Discuss the possibility of generalizing/transferring the findings of the study.

Refer to the paper 3 markbands when awarding marks. These can be found under the “Your tests” tab > supplemental materials.

Marks should be awarded according to the descriptors in the markbands. Each level of the markband corresponds to a range of marks to differentiate candidates' performance. A best-fit approach is used to ascertain which particular mark to use from the possible range for each level descriptor.

The command term “discuss” requires candidates to offer a considered review that includes a range of arguments. Conclusions should be presented clearly and supported by appropriate knowledge of generalizing the findings of the study in the stimulus material.

Generalization means drawing inferences from results of a study to something outside the study (external validity). The study in the stimulus is quantitative. The most appropriate model of generalization would be statistical generalization but that would require a random sample because this is typically representative of the target population.

Discussion points related to the possibility of generalizing/transferring the findings of the study in the stimulus material could include, but are not limited to:

• The sampling method (a convenience sample). In this study the population is university students in North America enrolled in an introductory psychology course. The study used convenience sampling and students could sign up for participation in the study or not (self-selection). This means that it is a non-probability sample rather than a random sample (probability sampling).
• The sample was relatively small with only 40 participants and therefore the sample is not considered statistically representative of the population even though the researchers had recruited an even number of males and females.
• The fact that students received credit for participation could also result in selection bias. When there is requirement to participate, students may be more likely to sign up for one study and not another on the basis of a convenient appointment time, rather than because they are making an informed choice about the kind of study they want to participate in.
• If the researchers added more participants to the sample it would enhance the possibility of generalization, as well as adding to statistical power. The more participants, the greater the chance that differences between participants will be balanced out, and therefore generalization is more likely to happen.
• If replications of this study arrived at the same conclusion (planned replication) the potential for generalization is enhanced. If the same theory of cause-effect relationship between multitasking and lowered performance found support in additional studies it would be more likely to confirm validity of the original findings. The result of this experiment has been supported by previous research and this indicates some external validity of the findings.

Candidates who use the terms generalization and transferability interchangeably should not be penalized.

This question was by far the one that candidates found most challenging. Generalizability in quantitative research refers to the extent to which findings from a sample can be generalized to an entire population provided that the sample is representative of the population.

Stronger answers referred to the fact that the sample in the experiment was a non-probabilistic convenience sample and based their discussion on knowledge of generalization from sample to population or statistical generalization, but such answers were rather few. Other candidates based their argument on internal and external validity as well as reliability of the results using concepts such as construct validity and population validity. Some of these answers were extremely generic, demonstrating sound knowledge but often it was not linked to the specific study.

Weaker answers only addressed the actual sample – that is, describing students in North America, equal numbers of females and males, etc, but wrote nothing on the sampling method and there was no discussion but rather statements. Such answers scored marks in the lower range. The weakest answers provided very limited statements with typical arguments being that results cannot be generalized to all students as everyone handles multitasking differently, or that multitasking can be distracting to some but not so much to others because some students are really good at multitasking in class, or that the results could not be generalized to older people as their brains are better developed. This kind of argumentation demonstrates a very limited knowledge of generalization in research and scored in the lower range.

It was often seen that candidates mixed up the concepts of generalization and transference, for example, using them interchangeably as if they are the same. Some candidates offered generic answers based on qualitative research such as representational, inferential and theoretical generalization without much understanding of the problems in such an approach in an experiment. Some also used the concept of transference in their argument in spite of the characteristics of the study in the stimulus paper.

Transference is a concept used in qualitative research and it is related to how people interpret the results of a qualitative study in terms of being able to be applied, for example to other populations or settings. However, it is important to notice that this is not an objective approach as with probability sampling and external validity. Some responses offered sensible arguments, especially of representational generalization as similar to generalization from sample to population or used the concept of population validity and this was credited.

Overall it seemed there is a need to teach what is understood by generalization in quantitative research as well as what is understood by transference (as well as representational, inferential and theoretical generalization) in qualitative research to help candidates master these different approaches to research.