Beyond the simple definition from the module notes, provide a detailed discussio.
Beyond the simple definition from the module notes, provide a detailed discussion of the differences between validity and reliability. Cite the readings in your response. Explain the ways in which validity and reliability are related to each other in evaluating social science research. For example, contentious methods or findings generate many scholarly assessments of the evidence, often the same evidence. Bearing this in mind and using at least two different views of similar evidence or research findings, cite specific readings and provide appropriate research examples to evaluate how validity and reliability are related, yet often contested among scholars. Referring to the readings and videos related to at least one area of applied human investigation, such as interrogation techniques, medical or behavioral psychology experimentations and diagnostic classifications etc., assess the validity and reliability of the method of investigation or practice and the evidence produced. The evidence collected or research findings are often offered as demonstrable proof of the quality or utility of the experiment or investigation, and you are to critically evaluate this in your selected example(s). Were the research or practice and its findings valid and reproducible? How do different scholars evaluate the evidence or research findings’ validity and reliability? Research on humans is fraught with both empirical and ethical dilemmas. This is certainly true in applied human investigations which may mix the social and medical sciences. Does the value of the evidence or research findings justify the methods used to collect and/or produce it? Are there some investigatory practices or research methods that are simply invalid, both empirically and ethically (eg., torture, or use of humans as guinea pigs in medical trials and experiments)?
The post Beyond the simple definition from the module notes, provide a detailed discussio appeared first on nursing writers.