Evaluating Articles Using the Four Validities
In 500-600 words for each article (1,000-1,200-words total), evaluate each of your articles using the four big validities.
For each article, work through the four big validities (construct validity, external validity, statistical validity, and internal validity) in turn, indicating whether the article does a good or bad job on each front. As you write, keep in mind that you are demonstrating your mastery of this material. Show that you know how to ask questions about each of the four validities. Demonstrate that you know what the answers to these questions mean. Use the attached “Article Interrogation Guide” to ensure you are investigating the appropriate material for each section.
This assignment uses a template. YOU MUST USE THE ATTACHED “Article Interrogation Template” TO RECEIVE FULL CREDIT FOR THIS ASSIGNMENT.
Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance.
Evaluating Articles Using the Four Validities
Article 1:
Construct Validity:
The article demonstrates good construct validity as it clearly defines the variables being studied and uses appropriate measures to assess them. The research methods align with the study's objectives, ensuring that the constructs are accurately represented.
External Validity:
The external validity of the article can be considered good as the findings are likely to be generalizable to the larger population. The sample size and selection process are well-documented, allowing for replication in other settings.
Statistical Validity:
The statistical validity of the article is strong, with appropriate statistical tests used to analyze the data. The results are presented clearly, with significance levels reported, making it easy to interpret the findings.
Internal Validity:
The internal validity of the article is also high, with controls in place to minimize confounding variables. The study design allows for causal inferences to be made, as the researchers have taken steps to ensure that the observed effects are due to the independent variable.
Article 2:
Construct Validity:
In this article, the construct validity is weak as there is ambiguity in how the variables are defined and measured. The lack of clarity in operational definitions raises questions about the accuracy of the study's conclusions.
External Validity:
The external validity of the article is questionable due to limited information provided about the sample and its representativeness. Without details on the population studied, it is challenging to assess the generalizability of the findings.
Statistical Validity:
The statistical validity of the article is compromised by inadequate data analysis techniques. The absence of key statistical measures and unclear reporting of results make it difficult to assess the robustness of the findings.
Internal Validity:
Internal validity is also a concern in this article, as there are potential confounding variables that have not been adequately controlled for. The study design lacks rigor in ensuring that the observed effects are indeed due to the independent variable under investigation.
In conclusion, while the first article demonstrates strong validity across all four dimensions, the second article falls short in several areas, raising doubts about the reliability and credibility of its findings. It is crucial for researchers to address these validity concerns to ensure that their studies produce meaningful and trustworthy results.