7860-U3D1-Identify the instrument or instruments used to quantify the data, the level of measurement for each instrument, and the statistics used to analyze the data. SEE DETIALS BELOW

Running Head: Quantitative research 1

Quantitative research 3

QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH

Student

University

School

Couse

Course code

Lecturer

Due date

Type of quantitative research conducted

The study was a longitudinal nature as information was collected continuously over a period of time of time in regards to the variables. The article by Johnson, (1977), was to be conducted all through time without proper specification of what the data collection was to be conducted and its end.

Variables under investigation and their measurement

The article seek to measure to justify the overall connection between the term validity and how it is utilized in quantitative research. The article reviews five types of validity namely descriptive, interpretive, theoretical, internal and external validity. In relation to the nature to the research study conducted, the discussions conducted are descriptive in nature and therefore measurement was largely based on predictions acquired from data sources, phenomenon, information acquired from investigators, perspectives acquired from theories, respondent reviews and from discussions acquired from peer reviewed articles. Critical self-reflections and critical examinations of the negative studies that offer alternative explanations to what the original findings portray is about.

Scientific merit and how and it can be improved

Research studies must have a certain quality in order to exhibit the most relevant results attainable. Quality in research can be used by organizations in the effort to alleviate the situation that a particular study reveals and should the results be incorrect it would lead to wastage in resources. Scientific merit therefore ensures that all research conducted is reliable and can be use with other sources for positive actions.

Efforts to enforce and improve scientific merit must firstly include expert review that should begin all through from development of the proposal all through to the final research. The advisors must also have the required expertise to ensure quality of the papers. The peer reviewers must also be selected in accordance to clearly articulated criteria. The researchers can thereby acquire the proper and reliable feedback based on the rules and procedures.

It would also be critical to fairly assess the research papers based on the properly defined processes. Moreover, it would be important to point areas where the study reveals conflict of interest. Consequently, the process of review must be in relation to the need of the area being addressed with regards to the amount of resources invested and the how complex the study is(Canadian Diabetes Association, 2016).

Lastly, all through the research study, and ethical committee should be paramount to properly and effectively institute the review process. Properly dealing with issues would help ensure confidence in the review and utilization of is data and other properties.

References

Canadian Diabetes Association. (2016). Tackling Peer Review: How to Improve Reviews and Minimize Abuse. Canadian Journal of Diabetes, 40. Retrieved from www.canadianjournalofdiabetes.com

Johnson, B. (1977). Examining the validity structure of qualitative research. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/246126534