MODULE 7

Internal and
External Validity in
Quantitative
Research
Presentation by GROUP 6

Table of Contents
I. Internal Validity
a. Introduction of Internal Validity
b. Threats to Internal Validity
c. Types of threats to Internal Validity
Page 02
II. External Validity
a. Introduction of External Validity
b. Threats to External Validity
c. Types of threats to External Validity
 Page 03

Internal Validity
-according to Fraenkel & Wallen (2009), it indicates that any
association that is seen between two or more variables should be
clear in what it represents rather than being the result of "something
else."
-the capacity to recognize change in the dependent variable that
are only related to the independent variable and not some other
unknown cause.
 Page 04

Threats to
Internal Validity
-Internal validity threats, as defined by Creswell in 2014, are
experimental techniques, treatments, or participant experiences that
risk the researcher's ability to make accurate from the information
about the population being studied or an experiment.
Page 05

Types of threats to
Internal Validity
 Page 06

01 History
Description of Threat:

-As time passes and events take place during an experiment, it's possible for

the outcomes to be significantly affected in ways that are unrelated to the

experimental treatment.
Actions that researchers can take :
-The researcher can have both the experimental and control groups
experience the same external events.
 Page 07

02 Maturation
Description of Threat:
-During an experiment, participants may develop or undergo other
changes that could have an impact on the results.
Actions that researchers can

take :
-During the experiment, the researcher can choose volunteers who are
mature or change at the same rate (for example, similar age).
 Page 08

03 Regression
Description of Threat:
-The experiment chooses participants with extreme test results. Naturally, during
the experiment, their ratings will certainly change. Over time, scores likely to
regress toward the mean.
Actions that researchers can
take:
-As qualifying characteristics for the experiment, a researcher can choose
subjects who do not have extreme scores.
 Page 09

04 Selection
Description of Threat :
-This selection bias, also known as the potential threat by subject
characteristics, is also referred to by Fraenkel and Wallen. Participants can be
chosen based on their potential for particular outcomes (e.g., their intelligence).

Actions that the researchers can take :

-The researcher can choose participants at random to ensure that
characteristics are likely to be distributed equally among the experimental
groups.
 Page 10

05 Mortality
Description of Threat :
-During an experiment, participants can leave for a variety of reasons. Thus, it
is impossible to predict how these people will succeed.

Action that researchers can take :

-A researcher can gather a big sample to account for dropouts or compare
those who discontinue with those who continue - in terms of outcomes.
 Page 11

06 Testing
Description of Threat :
-Participants become used to the outcome measure and retain answers for
upcoming assessment.
Actions that researchers can take :
-The outcome can be administered more than once, or the researcher can
utilize different items on a later test than on an earlier test.
 Page 12

07 Instrumentation
Instruments used to constitue a threat to the internal
validity of study :
1. Instrument Decay. Instrumentation can lead to issues if the instrument's
nature (including the scoring process) is affected in just about any manner.
2. Data Collector Characteristics. The most instrumentation that can have an
impact on the findings definitely includes the qualities of the dat. The type of
data a study collects may vary depending on the participants' gender, age,
nationality, language preferences, and other criteria.
 Page 13

3. Data Collector Bias. Additionally, it's possible that the individuals who collected
the data or scored the results may have accidentally manipulated the results to
increase the likelihood of particular outcomes (like support for the hypothesis).
Actions that researchers can take:
a. Scheduling the data collection or minimizing scoring during instrument
changes are the two main ways to manage instrument decay.
b. Using the same data collectors throughout, processing the data individually
for each collection, and making sure that each collector is used equally with all
groups are the main approaches to control this hazard.
c. Standardize all processes that normally require for training of the data
collectors in order to prevent results from being affected by their lack of
knowledge.
 Location
Page 14
08

Description of Threat :
-Different outcomes may have different explanations depending on the
specific places where data are gathered or an activity is carried out.

Actions that researchers can take :

-The researcher can hold location constant, which means they can maintain
the same position for each participant. If this is not possible, the researcher
should make sure that several sites do not uniformly support or undermine
the theory.
 Attitude of
Page 15

09
Subjects
2 subjects that view a study and participate in it that
also can threaten internal validity:
1. Hawthorne effect. A particular kind of reactive effect where just taking part in
an investigation as a study participant could have an impact on behavior.
- When the participants in the control group in intervention trials receive no
treatment at all, the opposite effect might also happen.
- They could as a result experience unhappiness or anger and perform worse
than the treatment group.
 Page 16

-Thus, even though it may not be true, it might seem as though the experimental
group is performing better as a result of the treatment.
2. John Henry Effect . The bias that results from participants in the control group
acting differently than they normally would to make up for their perceived
disadvantage when compared to the experimental group during an experiment.
Actions that researchers can take :
-Giving control or comparison groups a unique or unusual treatment
similar to what the experimental group experienced is one way to address
this threat.