Why a Trade-Off?the Relationship between the External and Internal Validity of Experiments

  1. Jiménez-Buedo, María
  2. Miller Moya, Luis Miguel
Journal:
Theoria: an international journal for theory, history and foundations of science

ISSN: 0495-4548

Year of publication: 2010

Volume: 25

Issue: 69

Pages: 301-321

Type: Article

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

More publications in: Theoria: an international journal for theory, history and foundations of science

Abstract

Much of the methodological discussion around experiments in economics and other social sciences is framed in terms of the notions of internal and external validity. The standard view is that internal validity and external validity stand in a relationship best described as a trade-off. However, it is also commonly held that internal validity is a prerequisite to external validity. This article addresses the problem of the compatibility of these two ideas and analyzes critically the standard arguments about the conditions under which a trade-off between internal and external validity arises. Our argument stands against common associations of internal validity and external validity with the distinction between field and laboratory experiments and assesses critically the arguments that link the artificiality of experimental settings done in the laboratory with the purported trade-off between internal and external validity. We conclude that the idea of a trade-off or tension between internal and external validity seems, upon analysis, far less cogent than its intuitive attractiveness may lead us to think at first sight.

Bibliographic References

  • Alexandrova, A., 2006. Connecting Economic Models to the Real World: Game Theory and the FCC Spectrum Auctions. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 36, pp.173-192.
  • Brehm, S.S. Kassin, S.M. and Fein, S., 1990. Social Psychology. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
  • Caamaño-Alegre, M., 2009. Experimental Validity and Pragmatic Models in Empirical Science. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 23, pp.19-45.
  • Campbell, D.T. and Stanley, J.C., 1963. Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research. Chicago: Rand McNally and Company.
  • Cartwright, N., 2007. Hunting Causes and Using Them. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Cook, T.D. and Campbell, D.T., 1979. Quasi-Experimentation: Design & Analysis Issues for Field Settings. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
  • Gneezy, U. and Rustichini, A., 2000. A Fine is a Price. Journal of Legal Studies, XXIX, pp.1-18.
  • Guala, F., 1999. The problem of external validity (or "parallelism") in experimental economics. Social Science Information, 38, pp.555-573.
  • Guala, F., 2002. On the scope of experiments in economics: comments on Siakantaris. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 26, pp.261-267.
  • Guala, F., 2003. Experimental Localism and External Validity. Philosophy of Science., 70, pp.1195-1205.
  • Guala, F., 2005. The methodology of experimental economics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Hogarth, R.B., 2005. The challenge of representativeness design in psychology and economics. Journal of Economic Methodology, 12, pp.253-263.
  • Kanazawa, S., 1999. Using Laboratory Experiments to Test Theories of Corporate Behavior. Rationality and Society, 11, pp.443-61.
  • Levitt S.D. and List, J., 2007. What Do Laboratory Experiments Measuring Social Preferences Reveal About the Real World? Journal of Economic Perspectives, 21, pp.153-74.
  • Lucas, J.W., 2003. Theory-Testing, Generalization and the Problem of External Validity. Sociological Theory, 21, pp.236-253.
  • Lusk, J.L. Pruitt, J.R. and Norwood, B., 2006. External validity of a framed field experiment. Economics etters, 93, pp.285-290.
  • Maki, U., 2005. Experiments versus models: New phenomena, inference and surprise. Journal of Economic Methodology, 12, pp.303-315.
  • Morgan, M., 2005. Models are experiments, experiments are models. Journal of Economic Methodology, 12, pp.317-329.
  • Morton, R. and Williams, K., 2009. From Nature to the lab: Experimental Political Science and the Study of Causality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Peacock, M.S., 2007. The Conceptual Construction of Altruism: Ernst Fehr's Experimental Conduct to Human Conduct. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 37, pp.3-23.
  • Shadish, W.R. Cook, T.D. and Campbell, D.T., 2002. Experimental and Quasi Experimental Designs for Generalized Causal Inference. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
  • Schram, A., 2005. Artificiality: The tension between internal and external validity in economic experiments. Journal of Economic Methodology, 12, pp.225-237.
  • Smith, E.R. and Mackie, D.M., 1999. Social Psychology. Philadelphia: Psychology Press.
  • Thye, S.R., 2000. Reliability in Experimental Sociology. Social Forces, 78, pp.1277-1309.
  • Vissers, G. Heijine, G. Peters, V. and Geurts, J., 2001. The validity of laboratory research in social and behavioural science. Quality and Quantity, 35, pp.129-145.
  • Webster, M. and Sell, J., 2007. Laboratory Experiments in the Social Sciences. Oxford: Academic Press/Elsevier.
  • Willer, D. and Walker, H.A., 2007. Building Experiments. Testing Social Theory, Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Data source: Dialnet