Final answer:
In psychological research, true random sampling is often deprioritized in favor of experimental control to establish causality. Convenience sampling is commonly used, although it may limit the generalizability of the findings. Random sampling is significant but may be less critical when experimental control is the primary focus.
Step-by-step explanation:
True random sampling is considered less critical in most psychological research because experimental control is often prioritized over representativeness. In psychological studies, ensuring that the conditions of an experiment are meticulously managed to isolate the effect of the independent variable is crucial for establishing causality. This control allows for a comparison between groups that are different in only one independent variable, thereby making it possible to draw conclusions about cause and effect relationships.
Convenience samples, which are sourced based on ease rather than probability, are common in psychological research due to practicality. For example, researchers might use students from introductory psychology courses as subjects. While this is practical, it also has implications in terms of generalizability - it's difficult to extrapolate the findings to the wider population since not everyone has an equal chance of being part of the study.
Random sampling is still important in research to achieve a sample that is representative of a larger population, as it gives each individual an equal chance of being included. However, in psychological experiments where control is paramount, the focus may shift away from striving for perfect randomness in sampling.