Response to the following:
The two chosen scenarios are Cross Sectional Study: Capital punishment deters crime and Time Series Study: Airline deregulation will result in lower airfares. The most important validity issue would be the same for both, internal validity. When viewing the internal validity, one is looking into the accuracy of the information that is being presented in conjunction with the causal claim (Langbein, 2012). In either claim, the information presented does not support that claim and therefore, a dispute arises as to the end result.
First, capital punishment deters crime has only been proven by the narrowest of margins. Information is provided that for every execution there is subsequently one to two separate deterrence from crime (Muhlhausen, 2007). Information of this nature would lead researchers to question the measurement as well as the external validities. When speaking of deterrence, the greatest expectation is that a noticeable, yet substantial, deterrence is present within society and the criminal justice system. A small measure of deterrence, albeit positive, does not provide society with a feeling of justice served. Adding weight to the death penalty argument is the fact that there are just as many researches into other deterrence measures towards crime reduction. In this instance, the most important aspect would be that the causal claim reads that the death penalty assists numerous factors necessary for the deterrence of crime. The readjusted claim gives the public an understanding that the death penalty is not the end-all-be-all solution to crime deterrence.
Next, airline deregulation will result in lower airfares is a claim that has no foundation. The deregulation of airlines allows for the monopolization of the larger airlines through mergers and takeovers of the smaller competition (Smith and Cox, 2008). Allowing the larger airlines to react in this manner cuts down the competition and therefore drives the prices up in an effort for the larger airlines to receive a greater profit margin. Thus, putting citizens that have to use air travel to either pay the higher prices or limit their face-to-face functions, which are very necessary for growth in business. An additional validity issue would be an external validity, in that the future of air travel could be in jeopardy without healthy competition. The higher prices would drive business executives to explore the boundaries of technology. Already, many businesses are using the teleconference and the live video conference to conduct a more personal style of business. The most important aspect is to allow healthy competition to drive airfares down. The reasoning here is that more air travel, at better than affordable rates, builds the bridges towards company growth. Therefore, company growth means economic growth with public benefits.
References
Langbein, L. (2012). Public program evaluation: A statistical guide (2nd ed.). Armonk, NY: ME Sharpe.
Muhlhausen, D. (2007). The death penalty deters crime and saves lives. Retrieved from https://www.heritage.org/testimony/the-death-penalty-deters-crime-and-saves-lives
Smith, F. and Cox, B. (2008). Airline deregulation. Retrieved from https://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/AirlineDeregulation.html
Remember to write directly to the original poster. In what ways do you agree or disagree that the validity issues in the scenarios of causal claim selected by your colleagues are the most important? Provide a rationale, including examples or references. APA format. In text citations.