Talk:External validity

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Statistics High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Statistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of statistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.StatisticsWikipedia:WikiProject StatisticsTemplate:WikiProject StatisticsStatistics
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

Untitled

Latest comment: 11 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

has anyone noticed the same definition has been given for both internal and external validity.

This article is rife with issues, but that's aside from my current point. Removed a link to transferability simply because the link was wrong, it went to an article on chemistry instead of Qualitative Statistics. 99.127.42.25 (talk) 11:22, 2 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

This article should have specific studies and research as examples instead of just saying "For example". Orca3214 (talk) 22:50, 3 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Is it just me, or does it look like this article only discusses external validity applied in social psychology? To me, it looks like the article about external validity ironically does not have external validity itself... What about research areas that do not conduct experiments with people, like physics or computer science? Jfresen (talk) 19:48, 27 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

Add topic