List Three Reasons Why A Study May Be Considered Invalid?

0 Comments

List Three Reasons Why A Study May Be Considered Invalid
Effect size is the measure involving the magnitude of the relationship between variables within a study. If a researcher finds significant results in a statistical test that has a low effect size, it means that the results may not be meaningful in a practical sense or may be due to something other than what the researcher initially considered.

A Type I significance error occurs when a researcher claims to have found significant support for a hypothesis when there is not enough support to make this claim. A Type II significance error occurs when a researcher claims to have found no significant support for a hypothesis when there is actually enough to claim significance.

Low statistical power could be considered a limitation in statistics because statistical power refers to the probability of correctly finding adequate support for a research hypothesis. If a statistical test has low power, then it is limited in finding adequate support.

As a result, this increases the probability of making statistical significance errors and could lead to a researcher making inaccurate assumptions or misinterpreting statistical data. The test questions used as a measurement in the study could be poorly designed or misinterpreted, the sample selection may not accurately represent the population, the researcher may have insufficient data to support the research claim, there may be interference in the results of the study from unrecognized variables, the scores may not accurately represent the theory about the subject, the test questions may be unrelated to the subject, or the test used may fail to predict a specific outcome that it is designed to measure.

If a researcher establishes the critical values of a study to be more conservative, the more power the researcher has in finding significant support for a hypothesis. In the same sense, the less conservative the established critical values are, the less power a researcher has in finding significant support for a hypothesis.

  1. It is important to be skeptical of statistical results reported in the media because the media often inaccurately report cause-and-effect variable relationships.
  2. The media also do not report research study limitations that researchers have noted and often deliver research results before sufficient data has been established to support a claim.

Statistics is important in advancing societal issues concerning tolerance and diversity because it helps to promote positive change. For example, if researchers find repeated statistical support that students with learning disabilities show improvement in academic performance after implementing an alternative learning program, then action towards improving conditions for various learning levels is more likely to occur.
View complete answer

Why might a study be considered invalid?

Invalid science consists of scientific claims based on experiments that cannot be reproduced or that are contradicted by experiments that can be reproduced. Recent analyses indicate that the proportion of retracted claims in the scientific literature is steadily increasing.
View complete answer

What is the condition that is directly related to the focus of your study?

A research question is a particular request to which the research attempts to respond. It is at the core of systemic inquiry and helps in precisely defining a direction for the research process.
View complete answer

What makes data invalid?

Invalid data refers to source data that does not agree with the logical table mapping that defines the source data as a relational table for refresh and replication purposes.
View complete answer

What affects the validity of a study?

Study validity The country on average produces 500 prosthodontic research studies annually. Lesser studies among these are getting translated into progressive research. These findings are unable to translate to advanced stage due to major limitations in the study design, methodology, motivation, interest, and funding.

The study design, instrumentation used, and data collection make the inferences obtained from these studies less valid. The validity of the study design is essential for both in terms of internal acceptance for standardization and in terms of external recognition for universal acceptance. The name valid is derived from the Latin word validus indicating strong.

This implies that the design and methodology followed should be strong and accepted globally. Validity in the study design denotes that the accuracy, trustworthiness of instruments used, and data or findings collected are highly ordered and obtained with a reduced systemic error.

  • When the validity is within acceptable limits, it aids in wider acceptance and it leads to progressive research.
  • The validity is of two types: internal validity and external validity.
  • The internal validity is the steps taken or standards followed by the researchers in the study environment to obtain the truthful results.

The external validity is the generalization followed for wider acceptance of global population. Although these validation procedures are essential for the clinical studies, greater care is necessary for in vitro studies for the progressive research. Numerous factors affect the validity of the study.

  1. The internal validity is affected by the size of the subject/specimen, type or variability of the subject, attrition of the samples, maturation, time taken for evaluation, history, and instrument or assessment sensitivity.
  2. The external validity is controlled by population representation, time/duration of evaluation, research environment, researcher characteristics, data collection, interaction of the subject to research, and control of independent variables.

It is essential that these factors are understood in study design and controlled for robust study design and acceptance. The study validity can be evaluated by translation or criteria. It can also be measured by content, face, predictable, creative, concurrent, convergent and divergent, or dissimilar measures of validity.

  • The validity in the study can be improved by defining the aim and objective of the study, synchronizing the assessment measures to the objectives.
  • In addition, it is advisable to compare with the outside environment or external measure for wider acceptance.
  • The structure of the study design can have different levels of validity.

The randomized clinical trial has higher internal validity than cohort, case-control, or cross-sectional studies. The observational studies have higher external validity compared to interventional studies. Adequate measure should be followed to avoid the issues, and it has to be optimized to obtain the essential validity in the study.

  1. The adaptation of appropriate study protocols such as CONSORT and STROBE aids in obtaining essential standardization.
  2. In vitro studies following the regular guidelines listed by the ISO, ADA, and BIS can establish higher norms and acceptance.
  3. Adherence to the study design, protocol, and following the validity measures aids in better appreciation of the studies and can enhance the translatory research to an advanced stage.1.

Tunis SR, Stryer DB, Clancy CM. Practical clinical trials: Increasing the value of clinical research for decision making in clinical and health policy. JAMA.2003; 290 :1624–32.2. Brewer M. Research design and issues of validity. In: Reis H, Judd C, editors.

Handbook of Research Methods in Social and Personality Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2000.3. Wikipedia Contributors. Internal Validity. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia; 21 July.2017. Available from:,4. Wikipedia Contributors. External Validity. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia; 10 November.2017.

Available from:,5. Calder BJ, Phillips LW, Tybout AM. The concept of external validity. J Consum Res.1983; 10 :112–4.6. Chander NG. Standardization of in vitro studies. J Indian Prosthodont Soc.2016; 16 :227–8. : Study validity
View complete answer

What are problems in a study called?

A research problem is a statement about an area of concern, a condition to be improved, a difficulty to be eliminated, or a troubling question that exists in scholarly literature, in theory, or in practice that points to the need for meaningful understanding and deliberate investigation.
View complete answer

You might be interested:  Why Is It Disrespectful To Wear A Hat In School?

What are those conditions where a research problem is not viable?

(a) It is researchable. (b)It is new and adds something to knowledge. (c)It consists of independent and dependent variables.
View complete answer

What are the problems faced by researchers during research?

Top 10 Challenges Faced By Researchers In Developing Countries – Research requires several ingredients; some difficult to manage, while others are difficult to arrange. It is done by a single individual, but requires the acceptance/approval of several others; guides, supervisors, defense committee members, interviewees, focus group members, etc.

In developing nations, research is in its incessant stage. Researchers face challenges in choosing a research topic, statement etc. In addition, researchers are faced with challenges associated with growth, infrastructural deficiencies, financial crunches, etc. Here’s a list of top 10 challenges that we found intimidating for budding researchers: Lack of Scientific Training: The research methodology is not systematic.

Many researchers undertake research work without having actual knowledge of the research methods. Even the guides do not have a thorough knowledge of the various methodologies. Before undertaking research projects, researchers should be well equipped with all the methodological aspects.

Lack of communication with the supervisor: A university professor is a busy person. It is important to have guidance on a research project. Poor communication gets on the way of the progress of the research. It is important to communicate with the supervisor to clarify the doubts regarding the research topic, to know what the supervisor expects from you and to learn more about your research topic.

Time management: Spending ample time in learning the skills and practical implementation consumes a lot of time. In such a scenario, taking out time for intense research and to draft a top-notch research paper becomes impossible. Not having a definite deadline: Deadlines are stressful.

  1. But not having a deadline can be troublesome during the Ph.D. journey.
  2. Deadlines help you get closer to your goals.
  3. Many times, Universities fail to implement a due date to submit the research paper, leading to confusion and improper time management among the scholars.
  4. A quantity of literature: It can be difficult to deal with the quantity of literature that one might have accessed.

The literature review is iterative. This involves managing the literature, accessing data that supports the framework of the research, identifying keywords and alternative keywords, as well as constantly looking for new sources. Implementing quality of writing within the literature review: A literature review has to go beyond being a series of references and citations.

  • You need to interpret the literature and be able to position it within the context of your study.
  • This requires careful and measured interpretation and writing in which you synthesize and bring together the materials that you have read.
  • Insufficient data: Insufficiency of data is a potential problem.
  • Most of the business establishments are of the opinion that researchers may misuse the data provided by them.

This affects the purpose of research studies for which that particular data may be of utmost importance. Lack of confidence: Lack of confidence is one of the most common problems among researchers. Researchers with low self-esteem feel less motivated thereby affecting the quality of the work.

  1. Concern that your focus is either still too broad or too narrow: This concern is inevitable.
  2. Be prepared to adapt your research as you look through the literature.
  3. This might require you to either increase its focus or narrow down so that the research is manageable.
  4. A broad focus for research might be narrowed down by adding an appropriate context or by looking for another variable within the research question or by focusing upon a theoretical viewpoint.

Library management: Library management and functioning is not satisfactory in many Universities; A lot of time and energy is spent on tracing appropriate books, journals, reports etc. Also, many of the libraries are not able to get copies of new reports and other publications on time.
View complete answer

What is not valid or invalid?

template.1 Validity and Invalidity, Soundness and Unsoundness The task of an argument is to provide statements (premises) that give evidence for the conclusion. There are two basic kinds of arguments. Deductive argument: involves the claim that the truth of its premises guarantees the truth of its conclusion; the terms valid and invalid are used to characterize deductive arguments.

  • A deductive argument succeeds when, if you accept the evidence as true (the premises), you must accept the conclusion.
  • Inductive argument: involves the claim that the truth of its premises provides some grounds for its conclusion or makes the conclusion more probable; the terms valid and invalid cannot be applied.

Valid: an argument is valid if and only if it is necessary that if all of the premises are true, then the conclusion is true; if all the premises are true, then the conclusion must be true; it is impossible that all the premises are true and the conclusion is false.

  • Invalid: an argument that is not valid.
  • We can test for invalidity by assuming that all the premises are true and seeing whether it is still possible for the conclusion to be false.
  • If this is possible, the argument is invalid.
  • Validity and invalidity apply only to arguments, not statements.
  • For our purposes, it is just nonsense to call a statement valid or invalid.

True and false apply only to statements, not arguments. For our purposes, it is just nonsense to call an argument true or false. All deductive arguments aspire to validity. If you consider the definitions of validity and invalidity carefully, you’ll note that valid arguments have the following important property: valid arguments preserve truth.

  1. If all your premises are true and you make a valid argument from them, it must be the case that whatever conclusion you obtain is true.
  2. We shall see below, however, that valid arguments do not necessarily preserve truth value: it is entirely possible to argue validly from false premises to a true conclusion).

Sound: an argument is sound if and only if it is valid and contains only true premises. Unsound: an argument that is not sound. Counterexample: an example which contradicts some statement or argument (ex. a counterexample to the statement “All fifteen year-olds have blue hair” would be a fifteen-year-old without blue hair); for an argument, a counterexample would be a situation in which the premises of the argument are true and the conclusion is false; counterexamples show statements to be false and arguments to be invalid.
View complete answer

How can you tell if the information is valid or invalid?

More Valid and Invalid Examples: Chapter 1 Supplement: ( Be sure to read Chapter 1 before reading this supplement.) In addition to helping you see logic as a practical tool, one of the most important goals of this chapter is to begin the process of having you understand what logic is and what it is not.

  • Many students will probably enter this class believing that being logical means being always right and successful.
  • Similarly, they will want to think of valid and invalid arguments in black and white terms.
  • That validity is always associated with truth and invalidity is always associated with falsehood.

It is difficult, but very important, to see that the practical value of logic is less immediate and more abstract. In this regard, every effort should be made to see that valid arguments do not guarantee truth unless you start with it in the premises, and that valid arguments may have false conclusions but that this implies a test of the premises.

Related to this understanding is the transformation that should be made in many students from what I call categorical thinking to hypothetical thinking. Most students, and probably most people for that matter, react very holistically to a controversy, argument, discussion, or claim. One of the reasons students have trouble with the notion of validity is that the examples in Chapter 1 require that they not react to an argument as a whole, but separate the reasoning from the content.

You might be interested:  When Should I Apply To Medical School?

They must judge the premises hypothetically, pretending momentarily that they are true rather than deciding immediately and conclusively whether they believe they are true. They must understand that once the implications of the premises are understood and the argument is judged to be valid or invalid, then they can shift mental gears so to speak and judge the content.

  1. Because of their categorical judgmental tendencies, students react immediately to the premises.
  2. Again and again it must be stressed that judging the reasoning does not mean judging the truth of the premises.
  3. Students must be reminded that the focus is always the same.
  4. If these premises are true, what follows? What are the premises saying and what are they not saying? And does the conclusion square with what the premises are saying.

The blind man example is a warm-up exercise for the more technical presentation of validity that follows. You can understand that because he is blind, z does not know for sure if his premises are all true. Some students, however, will need some help understanding all the reasoning steps.

  1. Every student will get the first step: The only way x could be deductively sure what color hat he has on would be if he saw two red hats.
  2. Since he said that he could not tell what color hat he had on, we know that he did not see two red hats.
  3. However, some students will fail to “hold on” to this thought while contemplating y’s situation and response.

What must be stressed at this point is that once x says “no,” everyone knows that x saw at least one white hat. If both can’t be red on y and z, then one has to be white. The one-eyed man (y) knows that x did not see a red hat on his (y’s) head and simultaneously a red hat on the blind man (z).

  1. Connect turning on one’s logical ability with using a tool to defend oneself against marketing and political manipulation. Connect logic, empowerment, and self-interest.
  2. The test items on the first page and the example of buying a car help in this regard. Being logical is like being picky. We don’t need to be picky all the time, but when something like buying a car and a lot of money are at stake, it is important to turn on one’s picky (critical) ability. One should also be very picky when deciding to go to war or not. Here is example related to the “up to” trick in advertising. In the fall of 2002 President Bush was busy making his case to the American people about the necessity of a war with Iraq. Other than the possession of weapons of mass destruction by Saddam Hussein the claim was made again and again that Al Qaeda and bin Laden were working with Saddam to hurt Americans, even though most intelligence and cultural experts claimed that they were enemies, that Saddam had persecuted Shiite Muslims for many decades (bin Laden is Shiite) and that Saddam was not likely to give any biological, chemical, and/or nuclear weapons, if he had any, to someone like bin Laden who might use them against him. So, in a speech on October 7, 2002 Bush stated that as for the Saddam-Osama link there were “high-level contacts that go back a decade.” In the context of Bush’s speech the insertion of this phrase made it seem that there was a dangerous ongoing relationship. But similar to the “up to” phrase, this phrase is vague and to be minimally true all one had to establish was that a decade ago there were some contacts. In fact, all that any intelligence agency could establish was that there were contacts between Saddam and a just developing Al Qaeda organization in the early 1990s. There was no evidence that Saddam was involved in 9/11 or that there was any current contact with bin Laden’s organization. Eventually Bush was forced to admit publicly that there was no evidence that Iraq was involved in 9/11.

  3. Understand what deductive validity is and what it is not.
  4. We will be using the concept of validity repeatedly throughout the semester and it will haunt you again and again in terms of understanding other concepts and, of course, performance on future tests if you don’t make an effort to thoroughly understand it now.

  5. Understand that the use of valid reasoning forces us to test our beliefs. Connect the technical points of valid and invalid arguments with a philosophical commitment to the value of critical thinking, testing beliefs, and individual growth and self-actualization.

Although this model is somewhat oversimplified, from one point of view our actions are like conclusions from a web of beliefs. If we reason validly, but don’t like the way our conclusions turn out, then we have tested our beliefs – we know that there is a problem with at least one of them.

  1. On the other hand, if we don’t reason validly, then we will know nothing about our beliefs when the conclusions don’t turn out the way we predicted.
  2. There is a value judgment involved in the worth of being logical – one that can be traced back to the culture of the ancient Greeks.
  3. We are assuming, as did the ancient Greeks, that it is good to test our beliefs.

Not every culture has agreed with this judgment and it could be wrong. However, I don’t believe it is and the book assumes the stance that in the long run we grow as individuals by testing our beliefs, even though the process is not always pleasant. Below are some more examples of valid and invalid arguments.

To judge if each is valid or invalid, ask the question, ” If the premises are true, would we be locked in to accepting the conclusion ?” If the answer is “yes,” then the argument is valid. If the answer is “no,” then the argument is invalid. Remember that both examples on page 20 are valid, even though it is not true that Sandy Beach is south of Kona, etc.

What matters is that “if” the premises in both arguments were true, we would be locked in to accepting the conclusion as true. Also, both examples on page 21 are valid, even though the people who are likely to make either of these arguments (Pro-choice vs.

  • More Valid and Invalid Examples:
  • #1
  • Anyone who lives in the city Honolulu, HI also lives on the island of Oahu.
  • Kanoe lives on the island of Oahu.
  • Therefore, Kanoe lives in the city Honolulu, HI.
  • #2
  • Anyone who lives in the city Honolulu, HI also lives on the island of Oahu.
  • Kanoe does not live on the island of Oahu.
  • Therefore, Kanoe does not live in the city Honolulu, HI.
  • #3
  • Anyone who lives in the city Honolulu, HI also lives on the island of Oahu.
  • Kanoe does not live in the city Honolulu, HI.
  • Therefore, Kanoe does not live on the island of Oahu.
  • #4
  • Anyone who lives in the city Honolulu, HI also lives on the island of Oahu.
  • Kanoe lives in the city of Honolulu, HI.
  • Therefore, Kanoe lives on the island of Oahu.
  • #5 #6

All crows are black. Only crows are black. John is black. John is black. Therefore, John is a crow. Therefore, John is a crow. Remember the key to judging deductive arguments to be valid or invalid is not whether the premises are true or false. Rather, the question is what are the premises saying and what are they not saying, and whether if they were true would the conclusion be true.

  1. Answers:
  2. #1 Invalid
  3. #2 Valid
  4. #3 Invalid
  5. #4 Valid
  6. #5 Invalid
  7. #6 Valid

After you do at least some of the problems in Exercise III, take the, Please note the details of a complete answer. My answers to #s 1 and 5 to Exercise III (pp.36-37) follow the following format: Valid or Invalid? Give the definition (p.18 or 22). Explain how the definition fits by explaining what the premises are saying, if valid, or what the premises are not saying, if invalid.

  1. Finally, answer the follow-up question or questions.
  2. The follow-up question is right after the question, “valid or invalid?”) Hint – Why Logicians Don’t Think Finally, although it is not necessary at this stage, as a preparation for our coverage of symbolic logic, you should know how professional logicians would figure out if these arguments are valid or invalid.
You might be interested:  What Education Do You Need For Welding?

They would not be thinking. They especially would not be thinking hard as you will be. Mostly what any logician would be doing is staring at the underlying PATTERN that exists for any argument. By simply recognizing the pattern, a logician would know instantly if the argument is valid or invalid.

  • Or simplified:
  • If A, then B. B So, A
  • These patterns are ALWAYS invalid, so any argument that fits one of these patterns is always invalid.
  • For #2, the pattern is:

For any x, if x is an A, then x is a B. x is not a B. So, x is not an A. Or simplified: If A, then B. Not B. So, not A. These patterns are ALWAYS valid, For #3, the pattern is: For any x, if x is an A, then x is a B. x is not an A. So, x is not a B. Or simplified: If A, then B.

Not A. So, not B. These patterns are ALWAYS invalid, For a local joke that illustrates this invalid argument, click, For #4, the pattern is: For any x, if x is an A, then x is a B. x is an A. So, x is a B. Or simplified: If A, then B. A So, B. These patterns are ALWAYS valid, Can you see how #5 has the same pattern as #1? Invalid.

As for #6, it is really the pattern of #4 in disguise. Here is the trick to all “Only” statements. To say that “Only C’s are B’s” is the same as saying “All B’s are C’s.” So #6 has the pattern: For any x, if x is a B, then x is a C. x is a B. So, x is a C.
View complete answer

How would you identify invalid data?

Circle invalid cells – On the Data tab, in the Data Tools group, click the arrow next to Data Validation, and then click Circle Invalid Data, Excel displays a red circle around any cells that contain invalid data. All cells that don’t meet their data validation criteria are circled, including values that were typed, copied, or filled in the cells, calculated by formulas, or entered by macros.
View complete answer

What weakens validity?

There are seven threats to external validity: selection bias, history, experimenter effect, Hawthorne effect, testing effect, aptitude-treatment and situation effect.
View complete answer

What errors affect validity?

How do I determine if my measurements are reliable and valid? – In order to determine if your measurements are reliable and valid, you must look for sources of error. There are two types of errors that may affect your measurement, random and nonrandom. Random error consists of chance factors that affect the measurement. The more random error, the less reliable the instrument.

1 List 3 things that might have introduced random error into Ms. Jones blood pressure reading. Some possibilities are: person taking the reading time of day instrument might not be reliable

table>

2 View complete answer

What is the problem of validity in research?

The Problem of Validity – No experiment can be perfectly controlled, and no measuring instrument can be perfectly calibrated. All measurement, therefore, is to some degree suspect. When the measurement is nonqualitative, this reservation may amount to no more than the acknowledgment that “accuracy” is limited.6 More generally, however, the issue of, locked icon
View complete answer

What are the 4 research problems?

What are the Sources of Research Problems? – Now that you know the types of possible research problems that you can focus on in a term paper, let’s look at the sources that you can use to identify research problems. From a research perspective, the kind of research problem that you wish to investigate should meet two conditions.
View complete answer

What are the two types of problem in research?

Summarizing the differences

Parameters Descriptive research problem Relational research problem
Data collection method Mail, online or offline surveys and interviews. Focus groups, surveys, case studies.
Research approach Structured Structured

View complete answer

What does it mean if an experiment is invalid?

How do you improve validity? – The method (including the analysis) may contain some assumptions that need to be satisfied, e.g. maybe something has been simplified, or an equation being used is an approximation. The experimental method must ensure that all the assumptions are satisfied, otherwise, you will end up using a method or analysis that is inappropriate, and the result will be invalid.

This equation assumes there is no flux leakage, so suitable equipment such as a ferromagnetic core must be used. If this assumption is not satisfied, then the experiment will be invalid.

Physics doesn’t need to be confusing Expert teachers, detailed feedback, one-to-one help! Learn from home with Matrix+ Online Courses.
View complete answer

What are the invalid data in research?

Invalid data are values that are originally generated incorrectly. They may be individual data points or include all the measurements for a specific metric. Invalid data can be difficult to identify visually but may become apparent during an exploratory statistical analysis.
View complete answer

What are errors of a study?

OVERVIEW

error in research can be systematic or randomsystematic error is also referred to as bias

TYPES Random error

error introduced by a lack of precision in conducting the studydefined in terms of the null hypothesis, which is no difference between the intervention group and the control groupreduced by meticulous technique and by large sample size

Type 1 error

‘false positive’ studythe chance of incorrectly rejecting the null hypothesis (finding a difference which does not exist)the alpha value determines this riskalpha (ɑ) is normally 0.05 (same as the p-value or 95% confidence interval) so there is a 5% chance of making a type 1 errorthe error may result in the implementation of a therapy that is ineffective

Type 2 error

‘false negative’ studythe chance of incorrectly accepting the null hypothesis (not finding the difference, despite one existing)this risk is determined by (1 – beta)beta (𝛽) is normally 0.8 (this is the power of a study) so the chance of making a type 2 error is 20%may result in an effective treatment strategy/drug not being used

Type I errors, also known as false positives, occur when you see things that are not there. Type II errors, or false negatives, occur when you don’t see things that are there

TECHNIQUES TO MINIMIZE ERROR Prior to Study

study type: a well constructed Randomised control trial (RCT) is the ‘gold standard’appropriate power and sample size calculations choose an appropriate effect size (clinically significant difference one wishes to detect between groups; this is arbitrary but needs to be: — reasonable — informed by previous studies and current clinical practice — acceptable to peers

During Study

minimise biassequential trial design — allows a clinical trial to be carried out so that, as soon as a significant result is obtained, the study can be stopped — minimises the sample size, cost & morbidityinterim analysis — pre-planned comparison of groups at specified times during a trial — allows a trial to be stopped early if a significant difference is found

At Analysis Stage, avoid:

use of inappropriate tests to analyze data — e.g. parametric vs non-parametric, t-tests, ANOVA, Chi, Fishers exact, Yates correction, paired or unpaired, one-tailed or two-tailed

At Presentation, avoid:

failure to report data points or standard errorreporting mean with standard error (smaller) rather than standard deviationassumption that statistical significance is equivalent to clinical significancefailure give explicit details of study and statistical analysispublication bias

View complete answer