Think about it this way- if you’re trying to make a general claim about people, which would you trust more: 7 replicated lab experiments that find similar results, or 7 field experiments in different contexts that find similar results?
-
-
Prikaži ovu nit
-
And if you can’t find similar results between situations in each of those conditions, which world do you learn more? 7 replicated lab experiments, or 7 replicated field experiments?
Prikaži ovu nit -
One of the biggest findings in behavioral science is that the environment influences your behavior. Why would we assume that results from a lab context that attempts to isolate a single environmental influence would be descriptive of what happens when there are many interacting?
Prikaži ovu nit -
It should also be pointed out that collaboration with business is a HUGE opportunity. They are able to deploy experiments to MASSIVE sample sizes. Think about
@katy_milkman and@angeladuckw work with 24 Hour FitnessPrikaži ovu nit
Kraj razgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
Crazy that many snooty academics still hold their nose up at that proposition. As if leaving the lab is a sign of doing bad science. But for all that obsession around methodological precision, still such low replicability in lab.
-
Right, and honestly, I care so much less about internal validity than external validity. I think the two support each other more often than not, but when in conflict, external validity is just so much more useful for decision making.
- Još 1 odgovor
Novi razgovor -
Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.
Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.