Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T03:19:35.128Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Philosophy of Science Perspective on the Validity of Research Conclusions: Response to Anderson and Hayden

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 July 2024

Pauline Houlden
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Anderson and Hayden argue that meaningful policy implications cannot be drawn from research which lacks “structural, sociological, and conceptual verisimilitude.” Pointing to my article, “Impact of Procedural Modifications on Preferences for Plea Bargaining” (pp. 267-291) as an example of research which lacks such verisimilitude, they conclude that I am unjustified in drawing conclusions with policy implications. I disagree with them for four reasons. Anderson and Hayden have: 1) based their arguments on a misunderstanding of Lind and Walker's discussion of the circumstances in which research need replicate reality; 2) misconceived the nature of theory; 3) created an unnecessary and unsupportable distinction between “structural,” “sociological,” and “conceptual” verisimilitude; and 4) misunderstood and misrepresented my article.

Type
Research Article
Information
Law & Society Review , Volume 15 , Issue 2 , 1981 , pp. 305 - 316
Copyright
Copyright © 1981 The Law and Society Association

Footnotes

*

I wish to thank Allan Lind, Susan Kurtz, Steven Balkin, and especially, Stephen A. LaTour, for their careful reading of and comments on this paper.

References

BERMANT, Gordon, MCGUIRE, Mary, MCKINLEY, William, and Chris, SALO (1974) “The Logic of Simulation in Jury Research,” 1 Criminal Justice and Behavior 224.Google Scholar
CALDER, Bobby J., PHILIPS, Lynn W., and Alice M., TYBOUT (1981) “Applying Consumer Research.” Unpublished manuscript, Northwestern University.Google Scholar
CAMPBELL, Donald T. (1957) “Factors Relevant to the Validity of Experiments in Social Settings,” 54 Psychological Bulletin 297.Google Scholar
CAMPBELL, Donald and Julian C., STANLEY (1966) Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research. Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
FEELEY, Malcolm (1979) The Process is the Punishment: Handling Cases in a Lower Criminal Court. New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
GERGEN, Kenneth J. (1973) “Social Psychology as History,” 26 Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 309.Google Scholar
HAYDEN, Robert M. and Jill K., ANDERSON (1979) “On the Evaluation of Procedural Systems in Laboratory Experiments: A Critique of Thibaut and Walker,” 3 Law and Human Behavior 21.Google Scholar
HEINZ, Anne and Wayne, KERSTETTER (1979) “Pretrial Settlement Conference: Evaluation of a Reform in Plea Bargaining,” 13 Law & Society Review 349.Google Scholar
KRUGLANSKI, Arie W. (1975a) “The Two Meanings of External Invalidity,” 28 Human Relations 653.Google Scholar
KRUGLANSKI, Arie W. (1975b) “Context, Meaning and the Validity of Results in Psychological Research,” 66 British Journal of Psychology 373.Google Scholar
KRUGLANSKI, Arie W. (1975c) “The Human Subject in the Psychology Experiment: Fact and Artifact,” in Berkowitz, Leonard (ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 8. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
KRUGLANSKI, Arie W. and Moshe, KROY (1976) “Outcome Validity in Experimental Research: A Re-conceptualization,” 7 Representative Research in Social Psychology 166.Google Scholar
LIND, E. Allan and Laurens, WALKER (1979) “Theory Testing, Theory Development, and Laboratory Research on Legal Issues,” 3 Law and Human Behavior 5.Google Scholar
LUTZ, Richard J. and James R., BETTMAN (1977) “Multiattribute Models in Marketing: A Bicentennial Review,” in Woodside, Arch G., Sheth, Jagdish N., and Bennett, Peter D. (eds.), Consumer and Industrial Buyer Behavior. New York: North-Holland.Google Scholar
MATHER, Lynn (1979) Plea Bargaining or Trial? The Process of Criminal Case Disposition. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
PILIAVTN, Jane A. and Irving M., PILIAVIN (1972) “Effect of Blood on Reactions to a Victim,” 23 Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 353.Google Scholar
POPPER, Karl R. (1959) The Logic of Scientific Discovery. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
SCHLENKER, Barry R. (1974) “Social Psychology and Science,” 29 Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1.Google Scholar
VIDMAR, Neil (1979) “The Other Issues in Jury Simulation Research: A Commentary with Particular Reference to Defendant Character Studies,” 3 Law and Human Behavior 95.Google Scholar