Database results:
examBoard: AQA
examType: GCSE
lessonTitle: Validity in Research
When psychologists conduct research, they need to make sure their findings are trustworthy and meaningful. This is where validity comes in. Validity is all about whether a study actually measures what it claims to measure and whether the findings can be trusted.
Key Definitions:
Imagine you're testing a new memory technique, but your test is actually measuring attention span instead of memory. Your results would be invalid! Without validity, research findings can be misleading or completely useless. Valid research helps psychologists make accurate conclusions and develop effective theories and treatments.
While validity is about measuring what you intend to measure, reliability is about consistency. A reliable study produces the same results when repeated. Think of it like this: a broken clock (showing 3:00) is reliable (always shows 3:00) but only valid twice a day (when it's actually 3:00). Good research needs both!
Psychologists consider several different types of validity when designing and evaluating research. Each type focuses on a different aspect of the research process.
Internal validity is about being confident that your independent variable (what you're changing) is actually causing the changes you see in your dependent variable (what you're measuring). Without good internal validity, you can't be sure what's causing what.
In the 1920s, researchers studied how lighting affected worker productivity at the Hawthorne Works factory. They found productivity improved when lighting was increased and when it was decreased! This wasn't about lighting at all - workers were performing better simply because they were being observed. This threat to internal validity (now called the Hawthorne Effect) shows how participant awareness can affect results.
External validity refers to how well research findings can be applied to real-world situations or other groups of people. Research with high external validity can be generalised beyond the specific study conditions.
This concerns whether findings from your sample can be generalised to the wider population. For example, if you only study university students, can your findings apply to older adults or teenagers?
This is about whether findings from your research setting (often a lab) apply to real-world settings. Lab studies can control variables well but might not reflect how people behave in everyday life.
Ecological validity deserves special attention because it's often a major criticism of psychological research. It refers to how well the study conditions, tasks and methods reflect real-life situations.
A study with low ecological validity might produce findings that don't apply to real-world settings. For example, memory tests in quiet lab conditions might not tell us much about how memory works in noisy, distracting everyday environments.
Field experiments in natural settings
Naturalistic observations
Real-life tasks and materials
Artificial lab settings
Unrealistic tasks
Simplified stimuli (like nonsense words)
Use realistic scenarios
Conduct field studies
Create more natural testing environments
Temporal validity refers to whether research findings remain valid over time. Society, culture and technology change, which means some psychological findings might become outdated.
For example, studies on how children learn from the 1950s might not apply to today's children who grow up with digital technology. Similarly, attitudes towards mental health have changed dramatically over time, affecting how people respond in studies about psychological disorders.
Researchers use various strategies to improve the validity of their studies:
In this famous study on eyewitness testimony, researchers showed participants videos of car accidents and asked questions using different verbs ("How fast were the cars going when they smashed/hit/contacted each other?"). The verb used affected speed estimates and later memory of broken glass. This study has good internal validity as the only thing that changed was the verb used. However, its ecological validity is questionable - watching videos differs from witnessing real accidents and participants knew they were in a study, unlike real witnesses.
When reading about psychological studies, it's important to critically evaluate their validity. Here are some questions to ask:
It's often impossible to maximise all types of validity in a single study. Lab experiments typically have strong internal validity but weaker ecological validity. Field studies have stronger ecological validity but less control over variables, weakening internal validity.
This is why psychologists often use multiple research methods to build a more complete understanding of behaviour and mental processes. The strengths of one method can compensate for the weaknesses of another.
Log in to track your progress and mark lessons as complete!
Login NowDon't have an account? Sign up here.