Do Student Samples Provide an Accurate Estimate of the General Public?

TLDR

Most psychological studies rely on student samples, which are considered more homogeneous than representative samples, yet the differences between student and general public samples are poorly understood. The study aims to determine how student samples differ from the general public and whether findings from students can be generalized to the broader population. Across 59 countries and 12 personality and attitudinal variables, the study found that student–public differences were substantial, inconsistent, and often contradicted prior findings; key cultural variables did not explain these differences, and students varied as much as the general population, indicating that generalizing from students is problematic.

Abstract

Most psychological studies rely on student samples. Students are usually considered as more homogenous than representative samples both within and across countries. However, little is known about the nature of the differences between student and representative samples. This is an important gap, also because knowledge about the degree of difference between student and representative samples may allow to infer from the former to the latter group. Across 59 countries and 12 personality (Big-5) and attitudinal variables we found that differences between students and general public were partly substantial, incoherent, and contradicted previous findings. Two often used cultural variables, embeddedness and intellectual autonomy, failed to explain the differences between both groups across countries. We further found that students vary as much as the general population both between and within countries. In summary, our results indicate that generalizing from students to the general public can be problematic when personal and attitudinal variables are used, as students vary mostly randomly from the general public. Findings are also discussed in terms of the replication crisis within psychology.