Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Ecological validity can be considered a commentary on the relative strength of a study's implication(s) for policy, society, culture, etc. This term was originally coined by Egon Brunswik [1] and held a specific meaning. He regarded ecological validity as the utility of a perceptual cue to predict a property (basically how informative the cue is).
The ecological validity of a sensory cue in perception is the regression weight the cue X (something an organism might be able to measure from the proximal stimulus) in predicting a property of the world Y (some aspect of the distal stimulus). The "ecological validity" of X1 is its multiple regression weight when Y is regressed on X1, X2, and X3.
Ecological psychology is the scientific study of the relationship between perception and action, grounded in a direct realist approach. This school of thought is heavily influenced by the writings of Roger Barker and James J. Gibson and stands in contrast to the mainstream explanations of perception offered by cognitive psychology .
In perception, "cue validity" is often short for ecological validity of a perceptual cue, and is defined as a correlation rather than a probability (see above). In this definition, an uninformative perceptual cue has an ecological validity of 0 rather than 0.5.
According to Tolman "Brunswik's untimely death on 7 July 1955, at the age of 52, came just as his doctrines of functionalistic achievement, representative design and ecological validity had begun to arouse widespread attention both in this country and abroad." [4] But the extent of his direct influence on psychology remains uncertain. [5]
It is an integrative perspective drawing from aspects of ecological psychology, cognitive science, evolutionary ecology and anthropology. Notions of domain-specific modules in the brain and the cognitive biases they create are central to understanding the enacted nature of cognition within a cognitive ecological framework.
"Ecological fallacy" is a term that is sometimes used to describe the fallacy of division, which is not a statistical fallacy. The four common statistical ecological fallacies are: confusion between ecological correlations and individual correlations, confusion between group average and total average, Simpson's paradox , and confusion between ...
Test validity is the extent to which a test (such as a chemical, physical, or scholastic test) accurately measures what it is supposed to measure.In the fields of psychological testing and educational testing, "validity refers to the degree to which evidence and theory support the interpretations of test scores entailed by proposed uses of tests". [1]