Validity in Quantitative Research Designs
Validity in Quantitative Research Designs
Yuan et al. 2009: An intervention program
Analysis of Potential Concerns about Internal Validity
This survey encompasses a research framework that seeks to establish an intervention plan to enhance the standards of physical fitness among nurses (Yuan & Chang, 2009). Although the study is characterized by numerous advantages, there are various concerns about the internal validity. The first notable concern about the internal validity of this survey is differential selection. During the survey, the researchers used a sample of 90 nurses from 5 departments of a health care organization in Taiwan. This raises a serious concern about differential selection because this sample size might not necessarily represent all nurses (Cantrell, 2011).
In quantitative research, it is fundamentally essential to use a large sample. Such a sample helps in averting potential shortcomings such as differential selection. Another potential concern about internal validity in this survey pertains to bias. The degree of validity in any kind of research is strongly dependent on the minimization of bias. In the survey, the researchers might be biased in terms of trying to obtain specific outcomes. For instance, they might try to show how exercises improve the wellbeing of nurses in health care organizations. This kind of bias tremendously undermines the standards of internal validity.
In this survey, the researchers have not established a comprehensive framework for mitigating instances of bias in the research. In the survey, bias might also arise in terms of the process of selecting participants. Such kind of an approach can significantly undermine the standards of internal validity. Another essential attribute of consideration with regard to internal validity pertains to the information provided by participants. In any research framework, it is extremely essential to ensure that the participants provide accurate information with regard to the topic of study (Polit, 2012). The quality of information provided by participants undermines the outcome of any quantitative research framework. The nurses participating in this survey might not necessarily provide accurate information as pertains to the study question. Consequently, the honesty and integrity of the participants is an essential attribute that serves as a concern in this research.
Experimental mortality serves as another potential concern in this survey. This encompasses of a situation in which some respondents leave the survey prior to its completion (Goodman, 2009). This has the capacity to significantly undermine the outcome of the entire research framework. The approach used in analyzing the data can also significantly jeopardize the standards of internal validity. It is fundamentally essential to ensure that the data analysis platforms are highly effective in terms of accuracy. This helps in streamlining the overall standards of research.
Recommendations
In order to alleviate the different concerns about internal validity, it is vital to use the random sampling method. Random sampling is an essential approach in quantitative research since it helps in minimizing bias (Shultz, 2008). Additionally, it is crucial to use different methods of data analysis in order to streamline the quality of outcomes. In essence, such an approach helps in attaining accuracy.
Dangers of failing to consider validity
There are numerous shortcomings for failing to consider the validity in any research study. Firstly, this approach would significantly undermine the implementation framework of research findings. The degree of implementing research findings is strongly dependent on internal validity. A lower degree of internal validity significantly derails the implementation framework. Another shortcoming pertains to research integrity. In the absence of adequate validity, the integrity standards of research are tremendously undermined.
References
Cantrell, M. A. (2011). Demystifying the research process: Understanding a descriptive comparative research design. Pediatric Nursing, 37(4), 188–189.
Goodman, M. (2009). Nursing research: An introduction. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE
Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2012). Nursing research, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
Schultz, L. E. & Rivers, K. O. (2008). The role of external validity, Rehabilitation Psychology, 53(3), 294–302.
Yuan, S. & Chang, Y. (2009). An intervention program , Journal of Clinical Nursing, 18(10), 1,404–1,411.
Is this your assignment or some part of it?
We can do it for you! Click to Order!
