Validity in research refers to the extent researchers can be confident that the cause and effect they identify in their research are in fact causal relationships.

Validity in Quantitative Research Designs

 

Validity in research refers to the extent researchers can be confident that the cause and effect they identify in their research are in fact causal relationships. If there is low validity in a study, it usually means that the research design is flawed and the results will be of little or no value. Four different aspects of validity should be considered when reviewing a research design: statistical conclusion validity, internal validity, construct validity, and external validity. In this Discussion, you consider the importance of each of these aspects in judging the validity of quantitative research.

 

To prepare:

 

• Review the information in Chapter 10 of the course text on rigor and validity.
• Read the method section of one of the following quasi-experimental studies (also located in this week’s Learning Resources). Identify at least one potential concern that could be raised about the study’s internal validity.
  • Metheny, N. A., Davis-Jackson, J., & Stewart, B. J. (2010). Effectiveness of an aspiration risk-reduction protocol. Nursing Research, 59(1), 18–25.
  • Padula, C. A., Hughes, C., & Baumhover, L. (2009). Impact of a nurse-driven mobility protocol on functional decline in hospitalized older adults. Journal of Nursing Care Quality, 24(4), 325–331.
  • Yuan, S., Chou, M., Hwu, L., Chang, Y., Hsu, W., & Kuo, H. (2009). An intervention program to promote health-related physical fitness in nurses. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 18(10), 1,404–1,411.
• Consider strategies that could be used to strengthen the study’s internal validity and how this would impact the three other types of validity.
• Think about the consequences of an advanced practice nurse neglecting to consider the validity of a research study when reviewing the research for potential use in developing an evidence-based practice.

 

Post on or before Day 3 (1) the title of the study that you selected and your analysis of the potential concerns that could be raised about the study’s internal validity. (2) Propose recommendations to strengthen the internal validity and assess the effect your changes could have with regard to the other three types of validity.(3) Discuss the dangers of failing to consider the validity of a research study

 

 REQUIRED RESOURCES

 

Readings

 

• Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2012).  Nursing research: Generating and assessing evidence for nursing practice (Laureate Education, Inc., custom ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
  • Chapter 10, “Rigor and Validity in Quantitative Research”

    This chapter introduces the concept of validity in research and describes the different types of validity that must be addressed. Key threats to validity are also explored.

  • Chapter 11, “Specific Types of Quantitative Research”

    This chapter focuses on the specific types of quantitative research that can be selected. The focus is on the purpose of the research rather than the research design. These include such approaches as clinical trials, evaluation research, health services and outcomes research, needs assessments, or replication studies.

• Cantrell, M. A. (2011). Demystifying the research process: Understanding a descriptive comparative research design. Pediatric Nursing, 37(4), 188–189.
  Retrieved from the Walden Library databases. (for review)

  The author of this article discusses the primary aspects of a prominent quantitative research design. The article examines the advantages and disadvantages of the design.

• Schultz, L. E., Rivers, K. O., & Ratusnik, D. L. (2008). The role of external validity in evidence-based practice for rehabilitation. Rehabilitation Psychology, 53(3), 294–302.
  Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.

  This article details the results of a study that sought to balance concern for rigor with concern for relevance. The authors of the article derive and determine a rating format for relevance and apply it to cognitive rehabilitation.

 

Note: For the Discussion this week, you will need to read the method section of one of the following quasi-experimental studies. Refer to the details provided in the Week 6 Discussion area.

 

• Metheny, N. A., Davis-Jackson, J., & Stewart, B. J. (2010). Effectiveness of an aspiration risk-reduction protocol. Nursing Research, 59(1), 18–25.
  Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.
• Padula, C. A., Hughes, C., & Baumhover, L. (2009). Impact of a nurse-driven mobility protocol on functional decline in hospitalized older adults. Journal of Nursing Care Quality, 24(4), 325–331.
  Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.
• Yuan, S.-C., Chou, M.-C., Hwu, L.-J., Chang, Y.-O,, Hsu, W.-H., & Kuo, H.-W. (2009). An intervention program to promote health-related physical fitness in nurses. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 18(10), 1,404–1,411.
  Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.