Skip to main content
Log in

A note on campbell's distinction between internal and external validity

  • Published:
Quality and Quantity Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The concepts of internal and external validity, developed by Norman Campbell, are widely used to structure methodological thinking about social research. This article points to ambiguities in the interpretation of those terms, both as regards the relationships they refer to as well as the sort of object that is held to be capable of internal and external validity. In addition, it is suggested that the distinction between these types of validity is fundamentally misleading because it reflects a failure to distinguish relations between events and relations between variables. It also rests on the false assumption that we can separate the discovery of causal relationships from the question of whether these apply to other cases than the ones studied. In the final section, an alternative conceptualisation of validity is sketched, one that avoids the problems identified.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • BrachtG.H. & G.V.Glass (1968). “The external validity of experiments”,American Educational Research Journal 5: 437–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • CampbellD. (1957). “Factors relevant to the validity of experiments in social settings”,Psychological Bulletin 54(4): 297–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CampbellD. & J.Stanley (1963). “Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research on teaching”, in N. L.Gage (ed.),Handbook of Research on Teaching, Chicago, Rand Mcnally.

    Google Scholar 

  • CookT. & D.Campbell (1979).Quasi-Experimentation, Chicago, Rand McNally.

    Google Scholar 

  • DenzinN.K. (1978).The Research Act, New York. McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • DominowskiR. (1980)Research Methods, Englewood Cliffs, Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • KruglanskiA. & M.Kroy (1976). “Outcome validity in experimental research: a re-conceptualization”,Representative Research in Social Psychology 7: 166–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • MillerA. G. (1986).The Obedience Experiments: a case study of controversy in Social Science, New York, Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • SmithH. W. (1975).Strategies of Social Research, Englewood Cliffs, Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • StarS.A. & H.M.Hughes (1949–50) “Report on an educational campaign: the Cincinnati plan for the United Nations”,American Journal of Sociology 55: 389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

Thanks go to John Scarth and John Bynner for comments on an earlier draft of this paper.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hammersley, M. A note on campbell's distinction between internal and external validity. Qual Quant 25, 381–387 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02484586

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02484586

Keywords

Navigation