Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Research design quantitative
The Similarity of Experimental Design And Quasi Experimental Design
The Similarity of Experimental Design And Quasi Experimental Design
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Research design quantitative
Quasi-experimental studies have several issues that lead to lack of internal validity of the study. These occur as a result of the experimental conditions not being highly controlled or randomized. This leads to intervention and control groups being nonequivalent leading to issues with study design. This is what is evidenced in the study conducted by Yuan et al. (2009) where five units assigned a number of 8 to 10 voluntary participants to either the experimental or control groups. There is thought to be a risk of bias in assigning participants to the two groups as a result of this. This comes from the random error that occurs on measurements across the two different groups. This random error also affects the statistical conclusion validity …show more content…
of the study since it creates an element of instability in the measurements making the results of the study to be highly unstable thus unreliable. Since there is a risk of bias with such quasi experimental designs, there is the introduction of a constant source of error into the results which creates the instability in the results. In a quasi-experimental design there is also the risk of self-selection effect.
This occurs when participants choose the group which they want to join. In this study, it can be expected that those nurses who are more fit and willing to embrace physical fitness were more likely to opt for the intervention group rather than the control group. This creates an error since it becomes hard to estimate whether the effect of the intervention is as a result of the intervention itself or a preexisting factor in the participant which in this case is the likelihood of joining physical fitness programs (Moss, 2007). Another threat to internal validity that may arise from this study by Yuan et al. (2009) is that of differential selection. This is where the study investigators are more likely to assign participants that fit a particular description to a particular group. For example it may be thought that those who were seen to be less fit were assigned to the intervention group in order to see if the intervention had any effect on this. This creates a variation in the groups that is much to the extreme (Sireci, 2007). Strategies to strengthen the study’s internal …show more content…
validity The best strategy to strengthen the study’s internal validity is to have an experimental design where participants are randomly assigned into either the intervention or control groups.
In this case, the investigators would have to come up with some sort of random code with which the study participants are then randomized to either the intervention or control group. They should stick to this randomization code despite issues with self-selection or differential selection. Additionally after using a randomization code, the code should be adequately concealed in order to prevent the investigators and the participants from being able to tell what the group that the next participant will land. The investigators should also make efforts to blind the participants, investigators and those involved in assessing outcomes. This generally ensures that there is no way in which the effect estimate can be influenced by external factors. In this study it may be difficult to ensure blinding (Mislevy, 2007). However, it may be attempted by choosing nurses in different shifts or those in different facilities who may not have time to meet and discuss about the study. Blinding of outcome assessors such as those performing fitness evaluations in this study can be ensured by making sure they test the participants without knowing which group they are
in. In order to improve the internal validity of the study, there is also need to design the control group as best as possible. This means that all factors that could affect the outcome of the study should be taken into consideration. For example, in this study, both the experimental and control groups were given the structured questionnaire to fill out. This way ensures that the two groups are equal in all possible ways apart from the actual intervention. In designing the control group, the investigators should have thought about having the control group perform a different activity such as eating or watching TV during the time when the intervention group is exercising. This may, however, be difficult to achieve considering the intervention was to exercise at home and the control group would also be required to perform the activity at home. Therefore there was no way to ensure this was done since it would invade privacy. The factors that threaten internal validity also affect the other forms of validity either positively or negatively. Therefore, since these strategies will lead to internal validity of the study, it is expected that the other forms of validity, construct, external and statistical conclusion validity will also be ensured. The one issue that stands out regarding validity is that in ensuring internal validity by ensuring blinding, it may make the results not to be generalizable across situations. This occurs, for example, when the nurses from a private hospital and public hospital are considered or nurses from different town with different realisms such as food, health, diet, etc. However, this can be ensured through including participants from as many regions as possible and ensuring randomization (Embretson, 2007).
10).” But the conductors of the review were sure to have mentioned “The ethical and patient safety implications of randomly assigned nurses to cases stating “randomization may be unacceptable to health service providers, research ethics committees and patients, particularly for high-risk patients and procedures (p. 15)”” (ASAH.org)
This systematic review conducted by Takeda A, Taylor SJC, Taylor RS, Khan F, Krum H, Underwood M, (2012) sourced twenty-five trials, and the overall number of people of the collective trials included was 5,942. Interventions were classified and assessed using the following headings.-
IRBs review all aspects of the researchers' project: the study design, the recruitment process, the participant population, the informed consent document and process, the risk/benefit ratio, privacy and confidentiality, data storage and protection, and safeguards for vulnerable participants (University of St. Francis, n.d.). In this way, participants' rights are protected because the effort is made even before the research begins. The review process ensures that participants are chosen fairly and adequately and the information collected during research is safeguarded through collection, use, and storage. Research using human participants is such an important part of medicine that it is imperative it is performed in a way that its intrigue is not compromised. The Institutional Review Board Process Applying for exempt research study approval from the IRB at the University of St. Francis involves submitting a copy of the work, an application, and a statement explaining why the researcher believes the study would be exempt from expedited or full-level IRB review approval.
3). By receiving approval, it can be inferred that the study was ethically acceptable and the rights of the participants are protected (Houser, 2015, p. 61). To ensure human subjects are protected during research studies, researchers use three ethical principals: respect for persons, beneficence and justice (Houser, 2015, p. 52). Respect for persons protects the individuals right to make their own decisions, beneficience is do not harm, and justice provides the right for every individual who wants the opportunity to partipate in the study can (Houser, 2015, pp. 52-53). Respect for persons was protected by the researchers because they provided informed consent prior to data collection, data collection would remain confidential, and the participants can withdraw from the study at any time (Bjerknes & Bjork, 2012, p. 3). Beneficence was protected in this study because the researcher wasn’t an employee from the hospital; this allowed new nurses’ to share their perceptions freely, preventing any fear of retribution from being honest (Bjerknes & Bjork, 2012, p. 3). Justice was not clearly stated in this study because the researchers did not clearly state if the study was open to all new nurses on all the wards of the hospital (Bjerknes & Bjork, 2012, p.
In order to have a successful, reliable experiment you need sufficient data and evidence, reliable research, variables to test and a follow – up experiment. There are several types of variables you need to do an experiment. An independent variable is the manipulated experimental factor that is changed to see what the effects are. A dependent variable is the outcome. This factor can change in an experiment in reaction to the changes in the independent variable. An experimental group is the group of participants that are exposed to the change that the independent variable represents. The control group is participants who are treated in the same way as the experimental group except for the manipulated factor which is the independent variable (King 24). Proper data, evidence and research is also needed so the experiment turns out correctly and you know what you are testing. A follow – up experiment is not required, however it helps the validity of the conclusion of the experiment. Validity is “the soundness of the conclusions that a researcher draws from an experiment” (King 25). Conducting a follow – up experiment will help researchers and people alike see if the experiment worked properly, continues to help people and see how participants are doing after the experiment is over.
Randomized Controlled Trials can be used to in several types of evaluations, including new therapies (i.e. Cognitive behavioral therapy versus emotionally focused therapy when treating couples), community interventions, and diagnostic techniques (O'Brien, 2013). The RCT study design randomly assigns participants into an experimental group or a control group. As the study is conducted, the only expected difference between the control and experimental groups is the outcome variable being studied (O'Brien, 2013).
Behavior is an important keyword when discussing health promotion theories because lifestyle modification requires a change in beliefs and attitude. Many health promotion theories explain how behavior can enhance or deter a patients progress in health related activities. Nola Pender, a nursing theorist and educator, has developed the Health Promotion Model (HPM). The three main parts of the HPM ar...
One strength of using a convenience sampling technique is that the researcher is able to take advantage of the ease of access to participants, they do not have to put in much effort to actively seek participants. However, a weakness to using convenience sampling is that the degree of generalizability
The study consisted of a significant number of females compared to males, which makes it invalid to conclude that the findings support the general population. A strength was that participants were selected at random. By doing so, the study remained unbiased, thus making the results more credible.
Researchers work hard to eliminate bias from outcomes through approaches that diminish subjectivity and modification from unknown sources. Randomization, use of well-matched controls, and blinding of analysts and researchers are some ways to try to a...
As the media bombard the American public with unrealistic images, a new obsession with fitness has hit the markets. With more and more people aiming to lose weight, the fitness industry has been pressured to accommodate the high demands for efficient and entertaining workouts. This greater variety of work-outs hitting the market is a result of the diverse types of people who are trying to get in shape. Health clubs are no longer only for those 20-30 year olds who are in competitive training or those who need to be fit as a job requirement. Instead, these facilities are now packed with people of...
When recruiting, it can get difficult because the participants may be withdrawn from the study, psychologically isolated, skeptical of the analysis projects or even intensely engaged with their present test. In this field, effect strategies need to be developed in order to collect samples.
Single-participant research has been used is psychology for quite some time. Although, it did take some time in the beginning to prove its worth, due to their differences from larger group designs. Ebbinghaus, Pavlov, and Skinner’s work (along with others) have been supportive of the single-participant research design. Throughout history, this design has demonstrated its effectiveness and continues today. With having a single-participant design, it allows the opportunity to repeat the measure, thus mirroring the aspects of group designs.
Subjects are selected by using a sampling process. Probability and non-probability sampling are the two main categories for determining subjects in the research process. Probability sampling includes obtaining subjects based on a random sample, whereas non-probability sampling uses subjects that are handpicked by the researcher, based on specific criteria. Data collected from non-probability sampling is specific to the particular criteria they are sampling and cannot be applied to the general public. Whereas data collected from probability sampling is less specific and can be applied to the general population (Borbasi, et al.,
The first step in conducting the study would be to randomly assign participants to two groups. One group would be the control group and would not be provided with vitamins, while the test group would be provided with vitamins.