Final Project, Part II: Evaluate a Quantitative Study
For Part II of your final project, you will comprehensively evaluate an article of your choice that reports on a quantitative study. (Remember, a quantitative study uses numbers as data.) Locate an article in the professional literature that addresses a topic you are interested in. Remember to use the Area of Interest interactive (Links to an external site.) to guide you in the selection process. The article you select should describe a quantitative study and should have all or most of the expected sections, either with their own headings or embedded in the article: Introduction, Literature Review, Methods, Results, and Discussion.
In writing your evaluation of the article, you will use Section 5.7 in your text. Do not simply tell what is in the article, but evaluate it using the questions in your text. Explain and justify your evaluation based on specific examples from the article.
Your paper should be 2100-2800 words in length (not counting the title, abstract, and reference pages) and comprehensively evaluate an article of a quantitative study. Use proper APA formatting and good writing and organization in your evaluation paper.
The following questions may help you in evaluating your articles, though you do not have to follow this format exactly.
i. Evaluate the Introduction and Literature Review.
o Do the researchers present an adequate rationale for conducting the study? Explain.
o What is the significance of the study? What difference will it make to the field?
o Is the literature review thorough and comprehensive?
o Do the researchers demonstrate any potential biases in the literature review?
o Are all-important concepts clearly defined by the researchers?
o Do the researchers clearly describe previous methods that are relevant to understanding the purpose for conducting this study?
ii. Evaluate the Purpose Statement and Hypothesis.
o Does the article clearly state the purpose statement?
o What is the purpose statement as expressed in the article?
o Is the purpose statement clearly based on the argument developed in the literature review?
o Are the variables of interest (i.e. independent and dependent) clearly identified in the purpose statement?
o What type of hypothesis is presented (alternative nondirectional, alternative directional, or null hypothesis)?
o Do the investigators provide a clear rationale for the direction of their hypothesis, based on the literature review?
o Is the hypothesis testable and falsifiable?
o Is the hypothesis stated with brevity and clarity?
iii. Evaluate the Methods Section.
o What type of sampling method is used? Is that appropriate?
o Are relevant demographic characteristics of the sample clearly identified?
o Do the methods of sample selection used by the researchers provide a good representative sample, based on the population?
o Are there any apparent biases in selection of the sample?
o Is the sample size large enough for the study proposed?
o Is a particular quantitative research design used (e.g. true experimental, quasi-experimental, etc.)? If so, what is it?
o Is the research design consistent with the purpose and hypothesis presented in the introduction?
o Are the independent variables clearly defined so that they can be replicated using the information provided in the procedures section?
o What are some of the potential threats to internal validity? How are they threats?
o What are some of the potential threats to external validity? How are they threats?
o Is there a clear and adequate description of the instrument (data collection measures) used?
o What types of measures were used in the study (direct observation, behavioral measures, self-report, etc.)?
o What are some of the potential problems or limitations with the types of measures used?
o To what extent are the instruments standardized, and what types of standardized scoring were used?
o Does the instrument appear to be appropriate for the sample?
o Is the reliability of the instrument reported? Is the reliability adequate?
o What types of validity are reported for the instrument used? Is the validity adequate?
iv. Evaluate the Results Section.
o What descriptive statistics were used? Do the researchers adequately describe the sample?
o What types of inferential statistics were used? Are the inferential statistics used adequate to answer the research hypotheses or questions?
o Is the analysis method clearly described?
v. Evaluate the Discussion Section.
o Do the researchers clearly restate the purpose and research questions?
o Do the researchers clearly discuss the implications of the findings and how they relate to theories, other findings, and actual practice?
o Do the researchers identify potential limitations of the study and the results?
o Do the researchers identify possible directions for future research?
vi. Remaining Questions.
o What aspects of quantitative methods do you still find challenging?
o Was there any information in the above list that you were not able to find in the article you chose?
In addition to your 2100-2800 word paper, upload a PDF copy of the article to the Dropbox.
PART ONE CAN BE FOUND ON THIS LINK https://www.homeworkmarket.com/questions/evaluate-a-qualitative-study-due-in-48-hours
Our order form provides entries for your order information such as the deadline, number of pages or words required, the level of assignment, and the subject area. Kindly provide your writer with as much information as you deem necessary for maximum output. Once you confirm that all the necessary details are presented, confirm the quotation and continue.
Proceed to checkout and complete payment for your order. The assigned writer will receive a notification and begin working on your assignment immediately. We do not reveal your personal details to anyone.
All our writers are highly skilled in various fields. We have a library of resources that are put in to developing your essays during the writing process. You can keep track of the progress by chatting with the writer or support.
Login to your account and click ‘completed’ tab on the left to download your paper.