The roots of sociodemographic differences – including sexual orientation, gender, ethnicity, urbanicity, SES, culture, and nationality – in developmental processes and trends are complex and likely the product of layered interactions among biological, behavioral, and sociocultural factors ( Betencourt & Lopez 1993 Crimmins & Saito, 2001 Jager & Davis-Kean, 2011 Phinney, 1996). We discuss future directions as well as potential obstacles to expanding the use of homogeneous convenience samples in developmental science. Therefore, when researchers are limited to convenience samples, they should consider homogeneous convenience samples as a positive alternative to conventional or heterogeneous) convenience samples. Although all convenience samples have less clear generalizability than probability samples, we argue that homogeneous convenience samples have clearer generalizability relative to conventional convenience samples. In lieu of focusing on how to eliminate or sharply reduce reliance on convenience samples within developmental science, here we propose how to augment their advantages when it comes to understanding population effects as well as subpopulation differences. Despite their disadvantaged generalizability relative to probability samples, non-probability convenience samples are the standard within developmental science, and likely will remain so because probability samples are cost-prohibitive and most available probability samples are ill-suited to examine developmental questions.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |