Above all, the researcher must take care that his chosen methodology differentiate the studied people, revealing the differences between them according to the chosen attribute. For psychodiagnostics are usually used methodologies that have passed a preliminary critical examination of the practice, which proved their scientific value. However, there are cases where non-aprotic methods are used in the research practice and are not validated for the given population of subjects under investigation. This should be taken into account as reducing the probative value of the revealed differences between the people surveyed. Psychodiagnostics is carried out with the help of a large and constantly growing range of tools, tools that can be combined with the concept of diagnostic methods.
Psychodiagnostics, the only purpose of which is to reveal a given attribute, is distinguished from psychodiagnostics aimed at establishing the location of the individual examined person on the axis of the continuum of expression of the sign. The first type of diagnosis is used to identify and specify deviations of the psychic signs from the norm. The second type of psychodiagnostics is applied in the study of individual-psychological differences. A great deal of the methods that form psychodiagnostic methods are tests of a different nature and personal questionnaires. There is no doubt that there is no unified and common for all nations and peoples, classes and social groups of culture, but a multitude of peculiar cultures with their subculture sub-branches. This fact is especially important in psycho-diagnostics, because the diagnostic methods are based on a culture. When analyzing psychodiagnostic issues, it is necessary to pay attention to the fact that there are different understandings about its role and place in psychological research. It is believed that it can achieve meaningful results in the study of the personality to obtain a certain characteristic of its nature but one that can not deplete the entire diversity of human personality.
The natural experiment is based on the active intervention of the researcher in the course of the psychic phenomena that are induced by the studied people in connection with the research task. When examining the essence of the experiment method, the question arises about analyzing the so-called "pure" experiment and quasi-experiment. A "clean" or even real experiment is one that the researcher can fully control both the independent variables and external variables, and accurately record and evaluate dependent variables. A quasiexperiment is one in which the experimentator gives up the full control of the variables because of the inability to perform it objectively. When conducting any experiment, an important issue that should always be considered by researchers is that of the internal and external validity of the experiment. Having an internal validity is the minimum without which the results of any experiment can not be interpreted.
Internal validity is expressed by whether the actual experimental effect that the experimenter actually did has led to the observed changes in the psyche of those surveyed in the course of the experiment. The external validity refers to the possibilities for summarizing the conclusion on what populations, situations, other independent variables, impact parameters can be disseminated the results of the experiment. Research practice shows that there are several different types of external variables that are relevant to the issue of validity during the experiment.
Hay mr. @godflesh
Anda sungguh luar biasa,,
Saya yakin, anda akan menjadi orang sukses,,,
Semangat terus mr. @godflesh
Good job and good luck..
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit