|
Internal validity is a property of scientific studies which reflects the extent to which a causal conclusion based on a study is warranted. Such warrant is constituted by the extent to which a study minimizes systematic error (or 'bias'). == Details == Inferences are said to possess internal validity if a causal relation between two variables is properly demonstrated.〔Brewer, M. (2000). Research Design and Issues of Validity. In Reis, H. and Judd, C. (eds.) Handbook of Research Methods in Social and Personality Psychology. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.〕〔Shadish, W., Cook, T., and Campbell, D. (2002). Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Generilized Causal Inference Boston:Houghton Mifflin.〕 A causal inference may be based on a relation when three criteria are satisfied: # the "cause" precedes the "effect" in time (temporal precedence), # the "cause" and the "effect" are related (covariation), and # there are no plausible alternative explanations for the observed covariation (nonspuriousness).〔 In scientific experimental settings, researchers often manipulate a variable (the independent variable) to see what effect it has on a second variable (the dependent variable).〔Levine, G. and Parkinson, S. (1994). Experimental Methods in Psychology. Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum.〕 For example, a researcher might, for different experimental groups, manipulate the dosage of a particular drug between groups to see what effect it has on health. In this example, the researcher wants to make a causal inference, namely, that different doses of the drug may be ''held responsible'' for observed changes or differences. When the researcher may confidently attribute the observed changes or differences in the dependent variable to the independent variable, and when he can rule out other explanations (or ''rival hypotheses''), then his causal inference is said to be internally valid.〔Liebert, R. M. & Liebert, L. L. (1995). Science and behavior: An introduction to methods of psychological research. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.〕 In many cases, however, the magnitude of effects found in the dependent variable may not just depend on * variations in the independent variable, * the power of the instruments and statistical procedures used to measure and detect the effects, and * the choice of statistical methods (see: Statistical conclusion validity). Rather, a number of variables or circumstances uncontrolled for (or uncontrollable) may lead to additional or alternative explanations (a) for the effects found and/or (b) for the magnitude of the effects found. Internal validity, therefore, is more a matter of degree than of either-or, and that is exactly why research designs other than true experiments may also yield results with a high degree of internal validity. In order to allow for inferences with a high degree of internal validity, precautions may be taken during the design of the scientific study. As a rule of thumb, conclusions based on correlations or associations may only allow for lesser degrees of internal validity than conclusions drawn on the basis of direct manipulation of the independent variable. And, when viewed only from the perspective of Internal Validity, highly controlled true experimental designs (i.e. with random selection, random assignment to either the control or experimental groups, reliable instruments, reliable manipulation processes, and safeguards against confounding factors) may be the "gold standard" of scientific research. By contrast, however, the very strategies employed to control these factors may also limit the generalizability or External Validity of the findings. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Internal validity」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|