Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
External validity is the validity of applying the conclusions of a scientific study outside the context of that study. [1] In other words, it is the extent to which the results of a study can generalize or transport to other situations, people, stimuli, and times.
In other words, the relevance of external and internal validity to a research study depends on the goals of the study. Furthermore, conflating research goals with validity concerns can lead to the mutual-internal-validity problem, where theories are able to explain only phenomena in artificial laboratory settings but not the real world. [13] [14]
A true experiment would, for example, randomly assign children to a scholarship, in order to control for all other variables. Quasi-experiments are commonly used in social sciences, public health, education, and policy analysis, especially when it is not practical or reasonable to randomize study participants to the treatment condition.
In qualitative research, a member check, also known as informant feedback or respondent validation, is a technique used by researchers to help improve the accuracy, credibility, validity, and transferability (also known as applicability, internal validity, [1] or fittingness) of a study. [2]
External validity pertains to the process of generalizing the findings of the study to the population from which the sample was drawn (or even beyond that population to a more universal statement). This requires an understanding of which conditions are relevant (or irrelevant) to the generalization.
Ecological validity, the ability to generalize study findings to the real world, is a subcategory of external validity. [ 6 ] Another example highlighting the differences between these terms is from an experiment that studied pointing [ 7 ] —a trait originally attributed uniquely to humans—in captive chimpanzees.
Clinical peer review, also known as medical peer review is the process by which health care professionals, including those in nursing and pharmacy, evaluate each other's clinical performance. [1] [2] A discipline-specific process may be referenced accordingly (e.g., physician peer review, nursing peer review).
The dominant research method is the randomised controlled trial. Qualitative research is based in the paradigm of phenomenology, grounded theory, ethnography and others, and examines the experience of those receiving or delivering the nursing care, focusing, in particular, on the meaning that it holds for the individual