BPS — Jan 10 – For those of you in the UK, you might want to attend this 6pm Valentines day event at the University of Winchester to see to see an evening lecture on online dating by Dr. Monica Whitty from Queen's University, Belfast. Who is doing it and how successful are they at it? Hosted by the British Psychological Society. Dr Whitty has done extensive research on Internet relationships.
The full article was originally published at BPS, but is no longer available.
BPS — Jan 10 – For those of you in the UK, you might want to attend this 6pm Valentines day event at the University of Winchester to see to see an evening lecture on online dating by Dr. Monica Whitty from Queen's University, Belfast. Who is doing it and how successful are they at it? Hosted by the British Psychological Society. Dr Whitty has done extensive research on Internet relationships.
The full article was originally published at BPS, but is no longer available.
“Dr Whitty has done extensive research on Internet relationships.”
Read her papers and see she had studied very small samples, less than “300 participants”
Could she propose a new innovative Hypothesis about Theories of Romantic Relationships Development and successfully prove it leading on to new discoveries?
NOT
Conclusions from scientific papers obtained using small samples (small scale of researching) seems to not be valid with real world (large scale of researching), e.g. Big Databases of (actual and future/to_be_launched_soon) Serious OnLine Dating Sites == big samples == more than 100,000 persons involved.
Kindest Regards,
Fernando Ardenghi.
Buenos Aires.
Argentina.
ardenghifer@gmail.com
Not sure why Fernando Ardenghi has stated this. Many of my samples are actually quite large (over 1000 participants). The smaller samples are typically the qualitative studies. Moreover, a sample of 300 is actually an adequate size for good academic research and can still be very valid and relate with the real world. There is no reason to have 100 000 participants and of course this can easily bring about sig results that should not be claimed to be signficant. This is what researchers refer to type I and type II errors.
If people have any specific questions about my research I’d be more than happy to explain things to you and explain why they are valid.
Do note that my work is published in credible sources peer reviewed by academics.
“Dr Whitty has done extensive research on Internet relationships.”
Read her papers and see she had studied very small samples, less than “300 participants”
Could she propose a new innovative Hypothesis about Theories of Romantic Relationships Development and successfully prove it leading on to new discoveries?
NOT
Conclusions from scientific papers obtained using small samples (small scale of researching) seems to not be valid with real world (large scale of researching), e.g. Big Databases of (actual and future/to_be_launched_soon) Serious OnLine Dating Sites == big samples == more than 100,000 persons involved.
Kindest Regards,
Fernando Ardenghi.
Buenos Aires.
Argentina.
ardenghifer@gmail.com
Not sure why Fernando Ardenghi has stated this. Many of my samples are actually quite large (over 1000 participants). The smaller samples are typically the qualitative studies. Moreover, a sample of 300 is actually an adequate size for good academic research and can still be very valid and relate with the real world. There is no reason to have 100 000 participants and of course this can easily bring about sig results that should not be claimed to be signficant. This is what researchers refer to type I and type II errors.
If people have any specific questions about my research I’d be more than happy to explain things to you and explain why they are valid.
Do note that my work is published in credible sources peer reviewed by academics.