Lin Hause, Werner Kaitlyn M, Inzlicht Michael
Department of Psychology, University of Toronto.
Rotman School of Management, University of Toronto.
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2021 Jul;16(4):854-863. doi: 10.1177/1745691620974773. Epub 2021 Feb 16.
Researchers run experiments to test theories, search for and document phenomena, develop theories, or advise policymakers. When testing theories, experiments must be internally valid but do not have to be externally valid. However, when experiments are used to search for and document phenomena, develop theories, or advise policymakers, external validity matters. Conflating these goals and failing to recognize their tensions with validity concerns can lead to problems with theorizing. Psychological scientists should be aware of the mutual-internal-validity problem, long recognized by experimental economists. When phenomena elicited by experiments are used to develop theories that, in turn, influence the design of theory-testing experiments, experiments and theories can become wedded to each other and lose touch with reality. They capture and explain phenomena within but not beyond the laboratory. We highlight how triangulation can address validity problems by helping experiments and theories make contact with ideas from other disciplines and the real world.
研究人员进行实验以检验理论、寻找并记录现象、发展理论或为政策制定者提供建议。在检验理论时,实验必须具有内部效度,但不一定需要具有外部效度。然而,当实验用于寻找并记录现象、发展理论或为政策制定者提供建议时,外部效度就很重要了。混淆这些目标并未能认识到它们与效度问题之间的矛盾可能会导致理论化出现问题。心理科学家应该意识到实验经济学家早就认识到的相互内部效度问题。当实验引发的现象被用于发展理论,而这些理论反过来又影响理论检验实验的设计时,实验和理论可能会相互束缚,与现实脱节。它们只能捕捉和解释实验室内部而非外部的现象。我们强调三角验证如何通过帮助实验和理论与其他学科的观点以及现实世界建立联系来解决效度问题。