Validity and Reliability in Research

Validity and Reliability in Research “Discussion 1- Though reliability and validity are both concepts used to evaluate the quality of research, and while they are closely related, they are not interchangeable.

How would you explain the difference between reliability and validity to an undergraduate nursing student with limited clinical experience? Explain how each concept is assessed and describe why the reliability and validity of a study are important for translation into practice. Provide examples and relevant literature to support your response.”

Reliability and validity are some of the terminologies used in describing the quality of research. These terms are used interchangeably despite having significant differences. Reliability describes the consistency of the results of a study. The consistency of a measuring tool in a study is also referred to as reliability. Reliability can either be external or internal. The term internal reliability is used as a reference to the consistency of a measure within itself (Cypress, 2017). For instance, the ability of the Michigan Neuropathy Screening Instrument questionnaire to promote feet evaluations among people at risk of developing diabetes can be used in describing the reliability of this tool and hence the quality of the study.

Buy this excellently written paper or order a fresh one from ace-myhomework.com

QUALITATIVE AND QUNATITATIVE RESEARCH

2

This tool is considered reliable if it generated consistent results when applied to different people. External reliability describes the consistency of test results when similar procedures are applied in the testing process. Reliability is important in research since it provides a strong base for the interpretation of results (Cypress, 2017).

The validity concept, on the other hand, describes the ability of a measuring tool or a test in a study to measure what it claims to measure. For instance, the validity of the Michigan Neuropathy Screening Instrument questionnaire is determined by its ability to identify symmetrical peripheral neuropathy in diabetes patients (Barbosa et al. 2017). The two types of validity are internal and external validity. Whereas external validity is used to describe how well generalization of study results can be done in real life, internal validity is used as a determination of whether detectable changes are associated with certain confounding variables or the independent variable. Validity is important in research since it helps the researchers to determine the best survey questions to use. Furthermore, validity helps the researchers to determine whether they are using the right questions to generate concrete data on the research topic.

“Discussion 2: What are the important criteria to consider when distinguishing between qualitative and quantitative resources for a literature review? What are the purposes of each? Provide examples of the types of quantitative research you considered when culling sources for your literature review, in addition to the types of qualitative research methodologies you intend to use and why.”

The literature review is an extensive assessment of information from various sources to determine their relevance in addressing a certain health issue. Researchers conduct a literature review of qualitative and quantitative resources during the search for information on certain

QUALITATIVE AND QUNATITATIVE RESEARCH

3

health practices and treatments. They can use different criteria to distinguish between quantitative and qualitative resources. One criterion is the determination of whether the selected resources expose trends in thoughts, opinions and perceptions in line with qualitative studies or whether the resources quantify the problem by generating data that can be easily transformed into operational statistics in line with quantitative studies. The study by Kaya and Karaca (2018) is a qualitative study since it intended to evaluate the nurses’ level of knowledge on foot care management.

The study design used in research also helps to determine whether resource falls under quantitative or qualitative study. The randomized controlled trial by Yokota et al (2019) aimed at determining the effectiveness of a foot care program in diabetic foot disease prevention is an example of a quantitative study.

The data collection method can also be used in distinguishing qualitative and quantitative studies. For instance, whereas qualitative studies use unstructured or semi-structured techniques to gather unquantifiable data from individuals or groups, quantitative studies use observation, surveys and questionnaires, document review and probability sampling to collect data. Data analysis and presentation are also important to consider when differentiating the two types of studies. Data in quantitative studies are analyzed statistically whereas data in qualitative studies is analyzed through narrative, content, grounded theory and disclosure analysis.

Qualitative research is used in social sciences as a way of exploring social interactions, processes, and systems. This study design provides detailed information on why people behave in a certain way. Quantitative studies, on the other hand, used measurable data in the formulation of facts in addition to uncovering patterns in research. Data from quantitative research is beneficial to the establishment of incidence and prevalence of the health problem in question.

QUALITATIVE AND QUNATITATIVE RESEARCH

4

QUALITATIVE AND QUNATITATIVE RESEARCH References Barbosa, M., Saavedra, A., Severo, M., Maier, C., & Carvalho, D. (2017). Validation and reliability of the Portuguese version of the Michigan neuropathy screening instrument.

Pain Practice, 17(4), 514-521. https://doi.org/10.1111/papr.12479 Cypress, B. S. (2017). Rigor or reliability and validity in qualitative research: Perspectives, strategies, reconceptualization, and recommendations. Dimensions of Critical Care Nursing, 36(4), 253-263. https://doi:10.1097/DCC.0000000000000253 Formosa, C., Gatt, A., & Chockalingam, N. (2016). A Critical Evaluation of Existing Diabetic Foot Screening Guidelines. The review of diabetic studies: RDS, 13(2-3), 158–186. https://doi.org/10.1900/RDS.2016.13.158 Kaya, Z., & Karaca, A. (2018). Evaluation of nurses’ knowledge levels of diabetic foot care management. Nursing research and practice, 2018, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/8549567 Yokota, K., Hayashi, Y., Kurata, J., & Fujita, A. (2019). Effectiveness of a Self-Foot-Care Educational Program for Prevention of Diabetic Foot Disease. Health, 11(1), 9-19. https://doi.org/10.4236/health.2019.111002

5