Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
Internal validity of any research design refers to the design's ability to make causal inferences from the data collected and the results of the study (Shadish, Cook, & Campbell, 2002). The research designs that offer the highest levels of internal validity are true experiments where the participants are randomly assigned to the conditions in the study. Quasi-experimental designs attempt to improve on the poor internal validity of correlational designs by allowing the researcher to control the assignment of participants to the treatment condition such as using some type of eligibility criteria, but due to the nature of the study the researcher cannot use random assignment. Most quasi-experimental designs are performed with intact groups that cannot be the subject of any random assignment (Shadish et al., 2002).
Metheny, Davis-Jackson, and Stewart (2010) performed a two-group quasi-experimental design to determine the effectiveness of an Aspiration Risk Reduction Protocol (ARRP) in critically ill, mechanically ventilated tube -- fed patients on an intensive...
Aside from the aforementioned problems with internal validity in quasi-experimental designs the Metheny et al. study has several threats to its internal validity:
1. Probably the most glaring threat to the internal validity of this study is that the researchers do not appear to have been blind to the conditions of the participants. The data was collected prospectively and data collection for the study was a permitted only on participants gave informed consent. It appears that the researchers knew which participants belong to which group. This could be a major threat to internal validity and to any generalizations of the study. A more useful way to collect data would be to not have the participant groups identified and to run the analysis without knowing which group was the treatment or control group.
2. Although there may be no way around this in some studies only getting data from a particular subset of the sample can threaten the internal validity of the study. In the current study, only those participants who gave…
References
Metheny, N.A., Davis-Jackson, J., & Stewart, B.J. (2010). Effectiveness of an aspiration risk reduction protocol. Nursing Research, 59(1), 18-25.
Shadish, W., Cook, T., & Campbell, D. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Validity in Quantitative Research Designs Validity Quantitative Research Designs Validity research refers extent researchers confident effect identify research fact causal relationships. If low validity a study, means research design flawed results . Threats to internal validity in quasi-experimental designs 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
internal validity and external validity are important when designing, implementing, and reviewing empirical research. Internal validity refers to the design of the research and its methodology. Issues like sampling, statistical analyses, robustness of the variables, survey instruments, and researcher bias can impact internal validity. With regards to my research question, internal validity is of the utmost importance. The independent variables in this case include two different types of interventions:
Validity in research is a term that refers to the extent with which researchers are confident that they have determined causal relationships through the cause and effect they identify in their study. As a result, validity is an important aspect of research since it helps in determining whether the research design is flawed and the credibility of research findings. There are various kinds of validity that are utilized in determining
The Challenges of Dual Credit: A Research Proposal Problem Statements Dual credit or dual enrollment programs “are designed to boost college access and degree attainment, especially for students typically underrepresented in higher education,” (United States Department of Education, 2017, p. 1). With this lofty goal set, it should seem that dual credit programs would be reducing the educational achievement gap. After all, dual credit programs by definition allow all students the opportunity
Validity, in essence, has got to do with the extent to which a given research study measures the accuracy of a specific concept – effectively meaning that a study can be said to have passed the validity test if it accurately mirrors that which the researchers set about to investigate. In quantitative research, as Polit and Beck (2012) point out, “researchers strive to design studies that are strong with respect
Eveland's research design is quasi-experimental. The sample populations for the experiment are not randomly selected. There is structure to the experiment with more than one form of measurement during the research process. Quasi-experimental design includes multiple groups and multiple waves of measurement. While there were not a significant number of groups in the experiment, there was more than one. At more than one point in the experiment, measurements were