External Validity Paper

External validity is when research findings are applied to the real world. When looking at 19-21 year olds on a college campus, we need to study a broad range of individuals coming from different cultures and backgrounds. We also need to look at which situations these are being applied to such as where they are there drinking habits taking place.

These questions will be in sections of gender, race, symptoms of anxiety, and their daily life. With these different sections I will be measuring if students experience more symptoms of anxiety when being a resident assistant or when not, as well as breaking it down by backgrounds of gender and race. Breaking it down will help me understand if certain backgrounds may impact the levels of anxiety that they might experience as a college student RA or not. The dependent variable will be the position of being a Resident Assistant and the independent variable will be the levels or symptoms of anxiety. The survey will be conducted by paper and the required materials will be provided so that the participant will be successful in taking the questionnaire. The reliability and validity will be measured after we gather all the

P-value represents a decimal between 1.0 to below .01. Unfortunately, the level of commonly accepted p-value is 0.05. The level of frequency of P>0.05 means that there is one in twenty chance that the whole study is just accidental. In other words, that there is one in twenty chance that a result may be positive in spite of having no actual relationship. This value is an estimate of the probability that the result has occurred by statistical accident. Thus, a small value of P represents a high level of statistical significance and vice

Thus, if the statistical test comes back showing a p-value less than 0.05, it is determined that the groups are significantly different from each other. The

External validity refers to the degree to which the results of a study can be generalized to other individuals, setting, and times.

There are a variety of threats to internal and external validity when referencing an experiment. Internal validity evaluates the soundness of the procedures in the experiment. It reflects the ability to accurately measure the impact of the independent variable on the dependent variable. Internal threats include history, maturation, selection, testing, reactive measures, instrumentation, regression to the mean, mortality, and diffusion or imitation of treatment.

Reliability refers to coherence, stability and dependability in test results, generally using internal consistency to express the levels of reliability in the test. The higher reliability indicates the higher level of accordance, stabilization and dependability in test results. Reliability is the precondition of validity (Guba and Lincoln, 1981). The same findings may not generate if the same research is repeated, because many influencing factors may work in the process of research. The process of establishment in reliability research includes: the research rigorously collect and explain data in consistent investigation (internal checks); the process is transparent (sample design, field work, inquiry and rational data). Patton (1987) suggests that the use of triangulation in multiple approaches can increase the reliability in results.

Regardless of whether the study is descriptive or experimental, the extent to which a study's results can be generalized or applied to other people or settings reflects its external validity. Group research engaging randomization will initially possess higher external validity than will case studies and single-subject experimental research that do not use random selection for the assignment.

Many schools and therapists are utilizing social stories for various populations and behaviors. In order to be accepted as evidence-based practice, more research under closely controlled conditions showing the efficacy and effectiveness of this intervention is needed. (Ali et al., 2006) (Reynhout et al., 2006)

In addition to external validity, this question on the exam also spoke to internal validity. Just to recap, internal validity, one of the main criterion for experiments, is referred to over and over again as the notion in which assuring that the relationship between two variables cannot be explained by anything other than the identified manipulated and measured variable (Morling, 2012). Internal validity can also be described in the terms of having a third variable, another plausible explanation, that influences the relationship between the initial two variables. In the question, the researcher examined her study again because of a third variable that could have potentially affected the original results of her study. That third variable

The author uses the statistical package (SPSS v.16) in order to compare and analyze data of the control and the experimental groups. The statistical tests described in the Method section or Data analysis paragraph but in the Result section.

(181) For example working on an experiment that has to do with real life situation would have less threats. However Internal and external goes together, because internal is establish, before external is an issue. (181) There are about 12 threats to internal validity and reliant on the end result the test could be biases or completely wrong.

measurement, researchers can evaluate after/before effect. Pretest and Posttest measurement is a critical instrument especially in this study because, this experiment focused on human psychology and as it is very vulnerable to the external changes. (Samples are imposed to see pictures)

Criticism: The setback which has been observed about this theory at times is that the theory uses a very small set of sample size while proposing a factual observation. However, a better way of ensuring the

External validity can be defined as the ability of a research design to generalize and provide results that shows that an effect that has been seen at the end of one research setting would be obtained in the other research setting as well even at different times, with different research participants and different research procedures. (Albert)