How representative are student convenience samples? A study of literacy and numeracy skills in 32 countries

Heather Wild, Aki-Juhani Kyröläinen and Victor Kuperman

PLOS ONE, 2022, vol. 17, issue 7, 1-22

Abstract: Psychological research, including research into adult reading, is frequently based on convenience samples of undergraduate students. This practice raises concerns about the external validity of many accepted findings. The present study seeks to determine how strong this student sampling bias is in literacy and numeracy research. We use the nationally representative cross-national data from the Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies to quantify skill differences between (i) students and the general population aged 16–65, and (ii) students and age-matched non-students aged 16–25. The median effect size for the comparison (i) of literacy scores across 32 countries was d = .56, and for comparison (ii) d = .55, which exceeds the average effect size in psychological experiments (d = .40). Numeracy comparisons (i) and (ii) showed similarly strong differences. The observed differences indicate that undergraduate students are not representative of the general population nor age-matched non-students.

Date: 2022
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0271191 (text/html)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id= ... 71191&type=printable (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:plo:pone00:0271191

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0271191

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in PLOS ONE from Public Library of Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by plosone ().