{"title":"使用无效比较的析因调查实验无效是不好的做法:从福斯特和纽格鲍尔(2024)学习","authors":"Justin T. Pickett","doi":"10.15195/v12.a5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Forster and Neugebauer's (2024) invalidation study is invalid. Their conclusion that factorial survey (FS) experiments 'are not suited for studying hiring behavior' (P. 901) is unjustified, because their claim that they conducted a field experiment (FE) and FS with 'nearly identical' designs is false (P. 891). The two experiments included: (1) different factor levels (for three factors), (2) different unvalidated applicant names (to manipulate ethnicity), (3) different applicant photos, (4) different fixed factors (e.g., applicant stories about moving), and (5) different experimental settings (e.g., testing, instrumentation, and conditions of anonymity). In the current article, I discuss each of these major design differences and explain why it invalidates Forster and Neugebauer's (2024) comparison of their FE and FS findings. I conclude by emphasizing that social scientists are better served by asking why FE and FS findings sometimes differ than by assuming that any difference in findings across the experimental designs invalidates FS.","PeriodicalId":22029,"journal":{"name":"Sociological Science","volume":"15 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Invalidating Factorial Survey Experiments Using Invalid Comparisons Is Bad Practice: Learning from Forster and Neugebauer (2024)\",\"authors\":\"Justin T. Pickett\",\"doi\":\"10.15195/v12.a5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Forster and Neugebauer's (2024) invalidation study is invalid. Their conclusion that factorial survey (FS) experiments 'are not suited for studying hiring behavior' (P. 901) is unjustified, because their claim that they conducted a field experiment (FE) and FS with 'nearly identical' designs is false (P. 891). The two experiments included: (1) different factor levels (for three factors), (2) different unvalidated applicant names (to manipulate ethnicity), (3) different applicant photos, (4) different fixed factors (e.g., applicant stories about moving), and (5) different experimental settings (e.g., testing, instrumentation, and conditions of anonymity). In the current article, I discuss each of these major design differences and explain why it invalidates Forster and Neugebauer's (2024) comparison of their FE and FS findings. I conclude by emphasizing that social scientists are better served by asking why FE and FS findings sometimes differ than by assuming that any difference in findings across the experimental designs invalidates FS.\",\"PeriodicalId\":22029,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sociological Science\",\"volume\":\"15 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sociological Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15195/v12.a5\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sociological Science","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15195/v12.a5","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Invalidating Factorial Survey Experiments Using Invalid Comparisons Is Bad Practice: Learning from Forster and Neugebauer (2024)
Forster and Neugebauer's (2024) invalidation study is invalid. Their conclusion that factorial survey (FS) experiments 'are not suited for studying hiring behavior' (P. 901) is unjustified, because their claim that they conducted a field experiment (FE) and FS with 'nearly identical' designs is false (P. 891). The two experiments included: (1) different factor levels (for three factors), (2) different unvalidated applicant names (to manipulate ethnicity), (3) different applicant photos, (4) different fixed factors (e.g., applicant stories about moving), and (5) different experimental settings (e.g., testing, instrumentation, and conditions of anonymity). In the current article, I discuss each of these major design differences and explain why it invalidates Forster and Neugebauer's (2024) comparison of their FE and FS findings. I conclude by emphasizing that social scientists are better served by asking why FE and FS findings sometimes differ than by assuming that any difference in findings across the experimental designs invalidates FS.
期刊介绍:
Sociological Science is an open-access, online, peer-reviewed, international journal for social scientists committed to advancing a general understanding of social processes. Sociological Science welcomes original research and commentary from all subfields of sociology, and does not privilege any particular theoretical or methodological approach.