In truth, it is difficult to critique Discovery Channel’s Mythbuster’s short segment on the myth regarded the danger of driving in heels because it is merely a clip of an entire episode. Some main issues that I saw with this experiment included variable definition along with simply a general lack of clarity. The men never defined exactly what constituted as ‘high’ heels. Is it three inches or six inch platfoms? Also, how exactly are they measuring ‘dangerous’ driving? It appears to be influenced by a time measurement on some sort of course, but the exact specifics are kept from the viewer. With this said, these definitions could have been given earlier in the episode.
Besides these previously mentioned critiques, a crucial problem is presented in the sampling of participants. As far as the viewer can tell, only two men who do not usually wear heels volunteered as participants. Some woman consider simply walking in heels to be dangerous while others can run across a field in stilettos, and these do not include men. The point is, people function differently in heels and having a sample of only two men is not an accurate representation of the general population that this study is looking at. Unless the study is focusing on the pair of Mythbusters and only the pair of Mythbusters; Again, this short segment did not clarify the variables or the population involved. Also, it seems very misleading that the researchers, who could be looking for a certain result, are the ones participating in the study.
With this said, the experiment did include a controlled environment in which there was both an independent and a dependent variable. In all honesty, I’m not sure of any real strengths of this experiment. If I were to do it over again, I would make sure to clearly define variables, my hypothesis, my experimental methods, and have a random sampling of participants.