Lecture
Within a particular study, the conclusions may turn out to be reliable (valid) or artifactual (unreliable, invalid).
Errors in generalization arise because the researcher violates the rules of logic (when relating general and particular premises) and substitutes the acceptance of unfounded arguments for the norms of hypothetico-deductive reasoning. As a result, the conclusions turn out to be artifactual.
Rules for organizing reliable conclusions:
- implementing the method presupposes not only a substantive evaluation of the hypotheses but also compliance with the method-specific norms for relating the results to the conclusions that can be drawn from them.
Evaluating the components of substantive planning as a condition for the reliability of conclusions.
The assessment of the reliability of conclusions is linked to the possibility of drawing, on the basis of the experiment conducted, conclusions that would be well-founded if the experiment approximated a flawless one. This includes assessing the legitimacy of the generalized statements made in the conclusions.
Stages of generalization (from the lecture):
- Generalization within the experimental situation.
Has the main effect been established? Or is the result artifactual? Generalization of the type of dependence.
- Controlling the generalization from the standpoint of who the participants were.
Can the results be transferred to other samples?
- Evaluating the hypothesis from the standpoint of the established data.
Internal, operational validity.
- Hypothetico-deductive generalization.
modus tollens; falsification of incorrect hypotheses.
- Interpretation from the standpoint of competing knowledge.
Thus, the assessment of the reliability of conclusions is made up of the following stages:
1) Evaluating the correctness of decisions about the experimental effect. The problem of statistical inference.
- reasoning carried out in the transitions between the various levels of the hypotheses being tested
- reasoning involved in justifying the interpretive link between the experimental and theoretical hypotheses.
2) Taking into account the scheme of conducting experiments – assessing the representativeness of individual data or of the obtained «averaged» dependences for the samples. (by chance or by regularity?)
Internal and operational validity ensure the reliability of the conclusion about the dependence within the research situation.
3) Generalizations beyond the situation (external validity, population validity).
«Control over the conclusion» presupposes a more formal aspect of evaluating the acceptability of a statement from the standpoint of analyzing the logically possible correlations of the empirical result and assessing the validity of the forms of experimental control.
The logic of drawing a conclusion should include the following components:
- the hypothetico-deductive path of reasoning with asymmetry of inference;
- the construction of experimental schemes, within the framework of inductive inference about the result of the action of the experimental factor and the possibility of a causal explanation of the change in the dependent variable;
- an inference about the experimental hypothesis based on an analysis of the obtained effect by relating the result to the validity assessment;
- the substantive justification of generalizations of the dependence beyond the experiment.
Comments