Analysis and comments of articles
Analysis and comments of articles
Order Instructions:
The writer will have to read each of this post and react to them by commenting, analyzing and supporting with relevant articles. The writer will have to read carefully before giving constructive comments on the post. The writer should write a one paragraph of at least 150 words. APA and in text citation must be use as each respond to the two post must have in text citations. The writer will have to use an article to supports his comments in each of the article. Address the content of each post below in a one paragraph each, analysis and evaluation of the topic, as well as the integration of relevant resources.
I will send the doc via email too be use in completing this paper. It is important that the writer read and constructively criticizes this paper with sources not older than 5 years old to support your point.
SAMPLE ANSWER
The writer will have to read each of this post and react to them by commenting, analyzing and supporting with relevant articles. The writer will have to read carefully before giving constructive comments on the post. The writer should write a one paragraph of at least 150 words. APA and in text citation must be use as each respond to the two post must have in text citations. The writer will have to use an article to supports his comments in each of the article. Address the content of each post below in a one paragraph each, analysis and evaluation of the topic, as well as the integration of relevant resources.
Article 1
Briefly describe the types of validity presented. What are the critical differences among them? Assess the authors’ performance in explaining them.
The main reason for validation in research is to give the readers and researchers a measure of assuredness and confidence that the methods and approaches are sound and useful (Lucko and Rojas, 2009). Straub, Boudreau, and Gefen (2004) discuss the major types of validity as, “content validity, construct validity, reliability, manipulation validity, and statistical conclusion validity” (p. 382). While Straub et al. (2004) acknowledge these are not the only concepts of validity; the authors are seeking to stimulate interest in using these measures for validity. Content validity is a validity check to ensure the data collection instruments have a holistic approach to measuring the construct accurately (Straub et al., 2004). Construct validity seeks to determine is the instrument chosen and construct alignment (Straub et al., 2004). Reliability measures the consistency of measurement amongst the variables (Straub et al., 2004). Manipulation validity is a measure of perceptions of the subjects in the study (Straub et al., 2004). Statistical conclusion validity focuses on the statistics used in the experiments (Straub et al., 2004). Straub et al. (2004) provide a working knowledge of the validities while using language the novice research can understand. The different validities focus on different aspects of the Doctoral Study, yet maintain alignments within the validation concepts (Straub et al., 2004).
Select a previous article from this course that presents a quantitative study. How would you assess the study’s validity? What information would you need in order to be able to do so, and is that information present in the article?
To assess the validity of the Ongori and Agolla (2008) study a researcher would need to focus on content validity, construct validity, reliability, manipulation validity, and statistical conclusion validity. Throughout the Ongori and Agolla (2008), study the authors reflect on the choices made to maintain the validity of the study. Some of the things done to enhance the validity were the pilot study, peer review, and statistical experiments (Ongori&Agolla, 2008). Through content validity, the researcher would assess the instrument to determine if there were biases present (Straub et al., 2004). The researcher would also assess whether there was a holistic approach to the instrument (Straub et al., 2004). To ensure reliability, the researcher would evaluate the consistency between the wording and view of the instrument (Straub et al., 2004). Ongori and Agolla (2008) study assessed manipulation validity through the work done with the pilot study. The pilot study incorporated the participant’s views and perceptions to eradicate biases in the questionnaire (Ongori&Agolla, 2008). Although a researcher will need to assess the content validity, construct validity, reliability, manipulation validity, and statistical conclusion validity the Ongori and Agolla (2008) does not provide all of the information necessary to make the evaluation. The researcher will need to review the research question, hypothesis, instrument, and raw data collected to help assess the studies validity. A researcher would question the validity of the study from Ongori and Agolla (2008) because, after receipts of the survey results, the authors decided to combine some of the responses without a full explanation why. Ongori and Agolla (2008) also bring in validity concerns with the application of meaning into the assessment of the responses.
Based on Table 8 on page 415 in the article by Straub, Boudreau, &Gefen, which positivist design contingency best describes the previous article for this course? Which best describes your potential Doctoral Study? Explain your selections.
The Straub et al. (2004) positivist design contingency that best fits with the Ongori and Agolla (2008) study is the “confirmatory research in well-established research streams” (Straub et al., 2004, p. 415). Determining the design contingency that best fits the researchers Doctoral Study is difficult. The researcher feels portions of several of the design contingencies fit with the proposed Doctoral Study, but largely the design contingency of “Theoretical Work” (Straub et al., 2004, p. 415). The researcher’s Doctoral study focuses on software requirement stability role in project success. While is current research available about requirement stability and project success, however, they have not been researched in the limited context the researcher is proposing. There are published theories concerning requirements stability and project success, but the researcher would refine those theories and then test them. The researcher is primarily looking for the relationships between requirements stability and project success.
References
Lucko, G., & Rojas, E. M. (2009). Research validation: Challenges and opportunities in the construction domain. Journal of construction engineering and management, 136(1), 127-135. doi:10.1061/(asce)co.1943-7862.0000025
Ongori, H., &Agolla, J. E. (2008). Occupational stress in organizations and its effects on organizational performance. Journal of Management Research, 8(3), 123–135. Retrieved from http://content.ebscohost.com/ContentServer.asp?T=P&P=AN&K=36351240&S= R&D=bth&EbscoContent=dGJyMNLr40SeprE4zOX0OLCmr02eqK5Srqa4SLGWxWXS&ContentCustomer=dGJyMPGss0q1qK5IuePfgeyx44Dt6fIA
Straub, D., Boudreau, M. C., &Gefen, D. (2004). Validation guidelines for IS positivist research. The Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 13(1), 380-427. Retrieved from http://aisel.aisnet.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3243&context= cais&seiredir=1&referer=https%3A%2F%2Fscholar.google.com%2Fscholar%3Fq%3DValidation%2Bguidelines%2Bfor%2BIS%2Bpositivist%2Bresearch#search=%22Validation%20guidelines%20positivist%20research%22
Include the one paragraph comments hear using ana pear review article to support your comments. Also include in text citations in APA.
Indeed, it is very important for researchers to understand various types of validity to boost the confidence of the researcher uses. The article has provided a precise discussion of various kinds of validities. Some of them are content validity, reliability, manipulation validity, construct validity, and statistical conclusion. These are the most important types of validity that researchers must ensure when carrying out their research. For instance, using manipulation validity will help understand the perception of subjects in the study and assess for any biasness in the study. Ways of assessing validity of a study have also been discussed in a precise manner. This has demonstrated in depth understanding on the various kinds of validity. Using peer review, pilot studies, or statistical experiments are essential ways to identify or assess validity in quantitative studies. This has been well illustrated and it makes it easy to understand. The article has as well tackled the issue of positivist design contingency well an indication of understanding in the areas. The article in general is credible and precise, as the author has based argument on evidence.
Article 2
Validity of any type of research falls under quality of a given study. There are different types of concerns in each type of methodology. For example, inn qualitative research, concern about assessing quality has manifested itself recently in the proliferation of guidelines for doing and judging qualitative work. Guidelines are developed by expert users and researchers and they usually set a standard parameter for distinguishing between a good vs. bad research. The issue of quality in qualitative research is part of a much larger and contested debate about the nature of the knowledge produced by qualitative research, whether its quality can legitimately be judged, and, if so, how. Even in a quantitative study, it is critical to assess the validity of research.
The article in question elaborates on four different types of validity; instrument, internal, external and statistical conclusion (Straub, Boudreau, &Gefen, 2004). It is important to analyze the validity of the doctoral study, since I am conducting a research within the healthcare sector; I reviewed an article that assessed quality in terms of validity. In healthcare, it is very important to study the patient behavior in terms of being complaint with their medical recommendations. The literature on patient adherence to treatment includes hundreds of empirical studies. A comprehensive examination of the findings requires the organization and quantification that is possible with meta-analysis (DiMatteo& Robin, 2004). The method used for this research was calculation of a meta-analysis of 569 studies reporting adherence to medical treatment prescribed by a non-psychiatrist physician, and 164 studies providing correlations between adherence and patients’ age, gender, education, and income/socioeconomic status; group comparison and multiple regression analysis of moderator (DiMatteo& Robin, 2004). The results showed significant insights into the literature on patient adherence, providing direction for future research. It was concluded that focus on reliability and validity of adherence measurement and systematic study of substantive and methodological moderators are recommended for future research on patient adherence (DiMatteo& Robin, 2004).
Reference:-
DiMatteo, Robin. (2004). Variations in patient’s adherence to medical recommendations: A quantatitive review of 50 years of research. Retrieved on November 25 2015 from http://journals.lww.com/lww-medicalcare/Abstract/2004/03000/Variations_in_Patients__Adherence_to_Medical.2.aspx
Straub, D., Boudreau, M.-C., &Gefen, D. (2004). Validation guidelines for IS positivist research. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 380-427. Retrieved from http://aisel.aisnet.org/cais
Include the one paragraph comments hear using an a pear review article to support your comments. Also include in text citations in APA.
This article has provided insights on the aspect of validity. The article is precise but with wealth of ideas. Various types of validity are applicable in different types of research methodology and therefore, it is very important that any researcher put this into consideration. Assessment of validity of research has to be done in both qualitative researches as well as in quantitative research. Actually, experts and researchers have the audacity to provide the guide on this as this will strike a balance. I do appreciate the balanced view on the researchers when it comes to assessing validity in qualitative studies as it illustrates that indeed there are inherent challenges and differences in opinion on the use of thee validity types. This has made the article objective and professional. The article has mentioned some types of validity as internal, instrument, external and statistical conclusion. These are important in any doctoral study to ensure that the researcher remain objective when carrying out the study. For instance, doctoral research in the field of health care would require the researcher to check and verify the findings of various empirical studies to ascertain whether they are reliable and valid. Use of meta-analysis techniques can actually be helpful in this as the article clearly explains. I conquer with the ideas enlisted in the article. The article is as well written and is objective, hence reliable.
We can write this or a similar paper for you! Simply fill the order form!
