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.
Cue validity is the conditional probability that an object falls in a particular category given a particular feature or cue. The term was popularized by Beach (1964) , Reed (1972) and especially by Eleanor Rosch in her investigations of the acquisition of so-called basic categories ( Rosch & Mervis 1975 ; Rosch 1978 ).
Debates over the validity of the IDH are ongoing within the discipline of tropical ecology as the theory is tested in various ecological communities. Other evidence exists for [15] [16] and against [17] [18] the hypothesis. The intermediate disturbance hypothesis has been supported by several studies involving marine habitats such as coral ...
Ecological rationality, in contrast, claims that the rationality of a decision depends on the circumstances in which it takes place, so as to achieve one's goals in this particular context. What is considered rational under the rational choice account thus might not always be considered rational under the ecological rationality account.
While gaining internal validity (excluding interfering variables by keeping them constant) you lose ecological or external validity because you establish an artificial laboratory setting. On the other hand, with observational research you can not control for interfering variables (low internal validity) but you can measure in the natural ...
Gallup reported the percentage of population uninsured throughout 2016 in states that expanded and did not expand Medicaid. For comparison, we added 2013 percentages for each state.
These criticisms include its lack of ecological validity, the use of an authority figure (the experimenter) that sanctions the interaction, a narrow focus on physical, retaliatory aggression, [9] [10] and lack of alternative options other than to retaliate. [11]