1

Research Evaluation: Experiment 1

09/30/2013
This experiment investigates how long lying takes and if the response time can be used to
distinguish between people telling lies and people telling the truth. According to the researchers,
this experiment was successful. I will be evaluating this experiment by answering 12 research
questions to consider whether this experiment meets the criteria for an overall reputable
psychological experiment.
Methodological Issues
According to Psychology Dictionary (2012) methodology is the outline of the process
behind the methods of collecting data. This experiment consists of a combination of interview
questions and survey questions. It should therefore be identified as an experiment; due to the fact
the researcher could control the event, and contained an accurate hypothesis and conclusion. The
strength of this method is, using questions to retain the information needed, for the experiment.
For example, there was an effective balance, by using a qualitative approach (interview
questions) and quantitative approach (survey questions). I saw no weaknesses in this method,
because the researchers found a balance, so they wouldnt get a bias amount of information.
Reliability
Cherry (2005) defines reliability as the consistency of a measure. To be considered
reliable, the same result would be obtained repeatedly. The response times, appear to be
measured accurately on a computer which could compute how long the response was, in
milliseconds. There was more than one researcher used, but we can assume that they all reached
a mutual conclusion, from the data they received after conducting the experiment. However
research was not done more than once with the participants. Instead the researchers tested a
2
Research Evaluation: Experiment 1
09/30/2013
greater amount of participants in order to retain a general overview. This study could be
replicated by someone else, by using a large sample size.
Internal Validity
Slack and Draugalis (2001) define internal validity as being able to justify that X actually
caused Y. It is also, the degree to which a study establishes the cause-and-effect relationship
between the treatment and the observed outcome. In my opinion, I do not believe the researchers
truly tested what they wanted to test. The participants were told what information they would be
asked. Therefore they could prepare which questions they were going to lie about, before the
researchers conducted their experiment. This could alter the information, because the participant
would take less time to come up with the lie, because they prepared for it. The participants could
also take longer time to lie in order to give the researcher what he/she was looking for. Thus,
giving the researcher the results he/she wanted. This was also strength because of the ethical
principles, it follows that the participants are given information. But from my viewpoint, less
information needed to be given, to ensure the experiment was accurate.
External Validity
Steckler and McLeroy (1998) define external validity, as the extent to which the results of
a study can be generalized or extended to others. The sample used for this experiment caused
limited the external validity. The sample only included females, where only 12 participants were
African American. In order for this sample to be representative of the population, males would
have to be tested, along with a wider variety of races. For example, as of now, this experiment is
only representing how response times for women (majority European Americans) can distinguish
telling a lie and telling the truth. The location of where the research was conducted seems to be
3
Research Evaluation: Experiment 1
09/30/2013
controlled in order to limit errors. However this was not a natural setting, which could affect the
participants. They could become nervous and anxious, due to the quietness of the room. If the
research was conducted in a more natural setting, the results would be less limited.
Usefulness
Karahanna (1999) claims usefulness, is having a beneficial use to a person/thing. This
research attempts to tell us, that it takes longer for a person to come up with a lie. This might be
important information, considering that not everyone can purchase a lie detector! Humans can
detect lies by simply picking up on the context clues, and response times of a person. Especially,
when it comes to judicial settings, where the judge must figure out who is truly in the wrong
during a case. This experiment made a successful attempt, using ethics, in order to make this
conclusion.
Ethics
Bersnoff (2003) notes ethics, as issues or invalid actions that occur in any psychological
experiment. This experiment, in my opinion, did not violate any BPS/APA guidelines. The
experiment told the participants, exactly what would be going on and respected them. They only
noted what truly a necessity in relation to their experiment was. These researchers followed their
guidelines in an exemplary, knowledgeable manner.




4
Research Evaluation: Experiment 1
09/30/2013
References
1. Bersnoff, D. (2003). Ethical Conflicts in Psychology. Washington, DC, US: American
Psychological Association.
2. Steckler, A. & McLeroy K. (1998). The Importance of External Validity. American Journal
of Public Health, 98(1): 910.
3. Draugalis J. & Slack M. (2001). Establishing the Internal and External Validity of
Experimental Studies. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, 2173-2181.
4. Karahanna E. (1999). The Psychological Origins of Perceived Usefulness and Ease-of-Use.
Information & Management Online Journal, 237-250.
5. Cherry K. (2005). What Is Reliability? The Importance of Consistency in Psychometrics
About.Com Guide.