An example of under generalization would be when some children think of an animal as something with four legs and fur and are therefore quite surprised when their teacher says that fish, birds, and insects are also animals.
Some examples of over-generalizations are:
Women love the color pink.
Irish people drink a lot of alcohol.
You can't trust a politician because so many of them are crooked.
overgenelizaton= some men bark more then dogs...some just bark louder than others
loaded language= in a world that dosnt... droid does (verozon, droid)
testimonials= get a flat stomach (slim away)
you know that according to a recent study looking at the drinking habits of students at Stanford and UCLA, all college students are involved in underage drinking?
A rainstorm is an example of
what are the example of herbivores that they eat plant or grass give 10 example
A suspension is an example of a dispersion.
A housing estate is not an example of an energy pyramid. A diamond ring is not an example of an energy pyramid. A cloud is not an example of an energy pyramid.
ozone layer is the big example
Statistical: must have random sampling, allows you to generalize to the population from which you randomly selected. Practical: do the results hold for similar individuals? allows you to generalize to similar individuals
To make a conclusion based from facts of a smaller sample to the bigger one!!
Reduced or limited generalizability
Pierre Paul William Duez has written: 'Testing the generalizability of ecological interface design to computer network monitoring'
Kurt Kraiger has written: 'Generalizability of walk-through performance tests, job proficiency ratings, and job knowledge tests across eight Air Force specialties' -- subject(s): Job evaluation, Occupational specialties, United States, United States. Air Force 'Generalizability of performance measures across four Air Force specialties' -- subject(s): Performance standards, Job evaluation
"A threat to external validity is an explanation of how you might be wrong in making a generalization."[4] Generally, generalizability is limited when the cause (i.e. the independent variable) depends on other factors; therefore, all threats to external validity interact with the independent variable.
Subject selection refers to the process of choosing participants or subjects for a research study. This process involves identifying and recruiting individuals who meet the specific criteria of the study in order to best answer the research question. Subject selection is critical for ensuring the validity and generalizability of study findings.
Some potential demerits of action research include limited generalizability of findings due to the specific context in which the research takes place, challenges in maintaining objectivity and bias in data collection and analysis, and the time and resources required to engage in the iterative process of action research.
When critiquing clinical papers, it is important to consider the study design, methodology, results, and conclusions. Look for potential biases, such as selection bias or measurement bias, that may impact the validity of the study. Assess the relevance and generalizability of the findings to your clinical practice and consider the strength of the evidence provided by the study.
Internal validity has to do with the accuracy of the results. Results could be inaccurate if samples are not selected randomly. External validity has to do with the generalizability of the findings to the population. If the sample selected is only Hispanics under the age of 25, then it would be hard to generalize the results to the entire US population.
Considering selection, attrition, and history is important because they can impact the validity and generalizability of research findings. Selection bias can affect the representativeness of the sample, attrition can lead to missing data and potential bias, and history can confound the results by external events occurring during the study period. By addressing these factors, researchers can improve the rigor and reliability of their findings.
Critics of Edward C. Tolman's work argue that his cognitive maps theory lacks empirical support and is too abstract to be rigorously tested. They also suggest that his emphasis on purposive behavior ignores the influence of unconscious processes and environmental stimuli. Additionally, some critics believe that Tolman's reliance on animal research limits the generalizability of his findings to human behavior.