Laboratory emergency experiments lack real threats and so offer low ecological validity.

Evidence

While there is a history of social psychology studies of escape behaviours using laboratory methods (e.g., Chertkoff, Kushigian, & McCool, 1996; Gross, Kelley, Kruglanski, & Patch, 1972; Mintz, 1951), some of these were conducted at a time when ethics committees had less sway, and therefore real threats (of pain) could easily be included in the design to add realism (e.g., Kelley, Condrey, Dahlke, & Hill, 1965; Klein, 1976). Our own designs did not include any threats (real or bogus), and so lack the key element that defines an emergency and which can be expected to impact on helping behaviour. The low ecological validity of the design therefore meant that real-world studies were also necessary. — John Drury, The role of social identity processes…, 58

Categorization

  • XREF: Connects to the general critique of artificial emergency paradigms and the push toward field and archival methods in social psychology. — connects to: Laboratory experiments cannot produce many real-world aggressive behaviors — Albert Bandura, Moral Disengagement: How People Do Harm…, 719; Laboratory experiments fail to capture the long time horizons of real cooperation. — Diego Gambetta, Trust - Making and Breaking Cooperative…, 550; Laboratory evacuation experiments lack the fear defining real emergencies. — John Drury, The role of social identity processes…, 58
  • QUESTION: Worth chasing: how did experimental ethics constraints reshape the whole emergency-behaviour research programme?
  • corroborated: 5 independent passages support this claim — John Drury, The role of social identity processes…, 58

Broader Connections