Colleagues Have Pointed Out, the Most Important

¶ … colleagues have pointed out, the most important feature of a research design becomes the question of internal validity and external validity. How can the researchers best design a study to test the hypothesis, while also maintaining internal and external validity? And given there are no perfectly designed experiments or research designs, which features are easiest to sacrifice? The issues that can be sacrificed depend on the nature of the study.

In this case, the authors are interested not necessarily in the end result of reducing STDs as much as increasing usage of the female condom. The research ends up simply showing what pedagogical or intervention methods are most effective at increasing female condom use in a specific community, and have little bearing otherwise. Share an insight from having read your colleague's posting. One colleague stated, "The author should have used a facility where less than 25% of women have used a female condom.

This could have given him a better idea if the sessions really worked." This is something I had not considered when reading the Choi et al. (2008) research. A more meaningful study would have applied to a population in need, which would have been one that required more targeted interventions. Moreover, the participants in this study were already prepped and knowledgeable about condom use in the prevention of STIs and STDs. Offer and support an opinion. Certainly it is ok to use paid incentives. In the Choi et al.

(2008) study, the researchers acquired informed consent and therefore obliged with the ethical guidelines of the research. A baseline questionnaire was then used and was self-administered using a computer. Furthermore, a $10 cash incentive was used. Whether or not this is ethical is a problem. As Seddon (2005) points out, paying participants to take part in research can be problematic from several different ethical perspectives. Justice, human rights, and business ethics are all potential areas of concern. In the Choi et al.

(2008) study, the financial incentive is not a serious issue, but it deserves to be mentioned. Validate an idea with your own experience. In my experience, designing research is extraordinarily difficult. An effective research design comes from experience. However, it is important to boil it down to the essence of the hypothesis. When the researchers understand what exactly the purpose of the study is, then the most effective design can emerge. In this case, the most effective design was to use the simplest method possible, which were self-report automated surveys.

There is no way of testing the veracity of the user responses, and there was no way to know how to extrapolate the data to a broader population. Make a suggestion. My suggestion would be to conduct a similar study in multiple STD clinics in Africa. Africa has devastatingly high rates of STD and HIV in particular. This would provide a more meaningful population to study, and would encourage investigation into the culturally specific communication variables that impact instruction or skills training to encourage use of condoms.

For example, the research needs to investigate what culturally relevant teaching skills or communication skills work in increasing the use of the female condom. There are other methods of outreach, too, and providing free.