ST. Thomas University NUR 705 Assignment 9.2: Quantitative Article Critique #1—Part II-Step-By-Step Guide
This guide will demonstrate how to complete the ST. Thomas University NUR 705 Assignment 9.2: Quantitative Article Critique #1—Part II assignment based on general principles of academic writing. Here, we will show you the A, B, Cs of completing an academic paper, irrespective of the instructions. After guiding you through what to do, the guide will leave one or two sample essays at the end to highlight the various sections discussed below.
How to Research and Prepare for NUR 705 Assignment 9.2: Quantitative Article Critique #1—Part II
Whether one passes or fails an academic assignment such as the ST. Thomas University NUR 705 Assignment 9.2: Quantitative Article Critique #1—Part II depends on the preparation done beforehand. The first thing to do once you receive an assignment is to quickly skim through the requirements. Once that is done, start going through the instructions one by one to clearly understand what the instructor wants. The most important thing here is to understand the required format—whether it is APA, MLA, Chicago, etc.
After understanding the requirements of the paper, the next phase is to gather relevant materials. The first place to start the research process is the weekly resources. Go through the resources provided in the instructions to determine which ones fit the assignment. After reviewing the provided resources, use the university library to search for additional resources. After gathering sufficient and necessary resources, you are now ready to start drafting your paper.
How to Write the Introduction for NUR 705 Assignment 9.2: Quantitative Article Critique #1—Part II
The introduction for the ST. Thomas University NUR 705 Assignment 9.2: Quantitative Article Critique #1—Part II is where you tell the instructor what your paper will encompass. In three to four statements, highlight the important points that will form the basis of your paper. Here, you can include statistics to show the importance of the topic you will be discussing. At the end of the introduction, write a clear purpose statement outlining what exactly will be contained in the paper. This statement will start with “The purpose of this paper…” and then proceed to outline the various sections of the instructions.
How to Write the Body for NUR 705 Assignment 9.2: Quantitative Article Critique #1—Part II
After the introduction, move into the main part of the NUR 705 Assignment 9.2: Quantitative Article Critique #1—Part II assignment, which is the body. Given that the paper you will be writing is not experimental, the way you organize the headings and subheadings of your paper is critically important. In some cases, you might have to use more subheadings to properly organize the assignment. The organization will depend on the rubric provided. Carefully examine the rubric, as it will contain all the detailed requirements of the assignment. Sometimes, the rubric will have information that the normal instructions lack.
Another important factor to consider at this point is how to do citations. In-text citations are fundamental as they support the arguments and points you make in the paper. At this point, the resources gathered at the beginning will come in handy. Integrating the ideas of the authors with your own will ensure that you produce a comprehensive paper. Also, follow the given citation format. In most cases, APA 7 is the preferred format for nursing assignments.
How to Write the Conclusion for NUR 705 Assignment 9.2: Quantitative Article Critique #1—Part II
After completing the main sections, write the conclusion of your paper. The conclusion is a summary of the main points you made in your paper. However, you need to rewrite the points and not simply copy and paste them. By restating the points from each subheading, you will provide a nuanced overview of the assignment to the reader.
How to Format the References List for NUR 705 Assignment 9.2: Quantitative Article Critique #1—Part II
The very last part of your paper involves listing the sources used in your paper. These sources should be listed in alphabetical order and double-spaced. Additionally, use a hanging indent for each source that appears in this list. Lastly, only the sources cited within the body of the paper should appear here.
Stuck? Let Us Help You
Completing assignments can sometimes be overwhelming, especially with the multitude of academic and personal responsibilities you may have. If you find yourself stuck or unsure at any point in the process, don’t hesitate to reach out for professional assistance. Our assignment writing services are designed to help you achieve your academic goals with ease.
Our team of experienced writers is well-versed in academic writing and familiar with the specific requirements of the NUR 705 Assignment 9.2: Quantitative Article Critique #1—Part II assignment. We can provide you with personalized support, ensuring your assignment is well-researched, properly formatted, and thoroughly edited. Get a feel of the quality we guarantee – ORDER NOW.
NUR 705 Assignment 9.2: Quantitative Article Critique #1—Part II
Introduction
In this paper, you will critique the article you choose in Week 6. Although the questions below are closed-ended, provide narrative answers about your evaluation/analysis of that particular aspect of the article.
Assignment Guidelines
Your paper should include the following components:
Provide a short summary of the article (one to two paragraphs)
Answers to the following analysis questions:
Is the title descriptive of the content of the article? Does it contain key words that help a person quickly identify the area with which the study is concerned?
Does the introduction provide a general explanation of the purposes and significance of the study?
Is there evidence that the authors are knowledgeable about the field? Has a summary of related studies been included in the introductory material?
Are the hypothesis or research questions clearly and explicitly stated?
Are the dependent and independent variables identified? Are they operationally defined? Are any extraneous variables identified as well as measures for controlling them?
Is the population clearly defined? Are the sampling procedures that give rise to the samples being used clearly defined? Are these procedures appropriate and defendable?
Are the data-gathering instruments identified, described, and/or explained? Has reliability and validity evidence been presented?
Are the experimental or statistical design and procedures clearly presented?
Are the data clearly described? Did the researchers provide a description of how they were analyzed? Did the researchers draw conclusions based on the data?
Have any unexpected or unusual results been identified?
Is the style of writing and presentation scholarly (spelling, grammar, organization of the article)?
State your overall evaluation of the quality of the research presented in this article. Based on your evaluation of items 1–11, would you say this is good research or not? Explain your evaluation.
Your complete critique should be no more than five pages and follow APA guidelines.
Turnitin
Your assignment will be scanned using Turnitin software. Turnitin is an online service that highlights matching text in written work. It indexes Internet sources, databases of subscription services, and written work submitted through its website. Assignments sent through Turnitin are scanned against all of its sources, and a report is generated that summarizes and highlights matching text and where it was found. It is up to instructors and students to interpret the report to determine if plagiarism occurred.
You may submit your assignment to Turnitin before its due date to assess your work against Turnitin’s database. You may use the
NUR 705 Assignment 9.2 Quantitative Article Critique #1—Part II
Originality Report’s results to address any originality concerns in your work, and then resubmit your assignment for grading. You may only submit and resubmit until the assignment’s due date. Any work that has been submitted at the time the assignment is due will be considered your final submission, and this will be the submission used for grading.
This week, you will learn more complex statistical testing. Most research studies need to compare more than two groups. For example, if you want to compare outcomes in three or four groups, you need a different statistical test.
Multiple-group comparison with a continuous variable measurement for categorical groups is done with an Analysis of Variance test, or ANOVA for short.
Learning Outcomes
At the end of this lesson, you will be able to:
Understand how the number of groups and variables impact the choice of statistical tests to compare differences.
Understand the purpose of multiple comparison testing.
Use JASP to compute a one-way ANOVA.
Correctly report findings of statistical tests in APA style.
Before attempting to complete your learning activities for this week, review the following learning materials:
Learning Materials
Read the following in your Kim, Mallory, & Vallerio (2022) Statistics for evidence-based practice in nursing textbook:
Chapter 11, “Tests for Comparing Group Means: Part I” pages 230–245
Read the following in your Polit & Beck (2021) Nursing research:Generating and assessing evidence for practice textbook:
Chapter 18, “Inferential Statistics” pages 396 (starting at “Testing Mean Differences with Three or More Groups”) through 400
Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)
Let’s say you want to find out if the beverage that people drink affects their reaction time. So you set up an experiment with three groups of people. The first group gets water to drink. The second group gets some sugary fruit juice, and the third group gets coffee. Now you test everyone’s reaction time, and you want to know if there’s any difference in reaction time between the groups. The null hypothesis says that the mean reaction time for all three groups is the same. If there were only two groups, you could use a T test to find out if there’s a difference between them. But when you have three groups or more, you need to use a different approach: the analysis of variance.
When you do the experiment, the scores won’t all be the same. The total variation of all the scores is made up of two parts. The variation within each group, because the people in each group have different reaction times, and the variation between the groups, because the drinks you gave each group are different.
Here’s an example: Look at this set of scores. They’ve been sorted into order to make it easier to see the patterns. You can see that there’s a lot of variation within each group. Some people are faster and some are much slower. But all the groups look pretty much alike. There’s not much variation between the groups. In this case you’d say that most of the difference is due to the people, and the drink didn’t make much of a difference. You would accept the null hypothesis that the type of drink doesn’t have any effect on reaction time.
Now let’s look at a different set of numbers. In this case, all the scores within each group are very close to one another. There’s not a lot of variance within each group. But the groups are very different from one of another. There’s a lot of difference between the groups. In this case, you would reject the null hypothesis. In this case, the type of drink makes a big difference.
So here’s the idea behind analysis of variance: Figure out how much of the total variance comes from the between groups variance, and the within groups variance. Take the ratio of between groups to within groups of variance, and the larger this number is, the more likely it is that the means of the groups really are different and that you should reject the null hypothesis.
In the examples, it was obvious where the variance was. Now look at these numbers. You probably can’t tell if there’s a significant effect because it’s not clear whether there’s more variance within groups, or between groups, or how much. The calculations show that the ratio is 4.27, which has a probability of 0.04. So in this case, you can reject the null hypothesis. With these numbers, the drink you give the people does have an effect on their reaction time.
What’s that two comma 12 doing there? Those are the degrees of freedom for variance between groups and variance within groups. And here’s how you calculate the degrees of freedom when you report results for analysis of variance.
This trick of separating the variance not only works when you have three or more groups; it also works when you have multiple variables. For example, if you test three groups for reaction time in the morning, and you test another three groups in the evening, an analysis of variance can tell you if there’s a significant effect for the type of drink, or if the time of day makes a difference, or if there’s some interaction. For example, coffee might be more effective in the morning than in the evening.
So to recap, here’s the main idea of analysis of variance: You figure how much of the total variance comes from between the groups, and how much comes from within the groups. If most of the variation is between groups, there’s probably a significant effect. If most of the variation is within groups, there’s probably not a significant effect.
Quantitative Article Critique—Part II
Criteria
Ratings
Pts
Analysis of Title and Introduction
2 pts
Meets Expectations
The title and introduction to the paper are succinctly critiqued according to the assignment guidelines.
1 pts
Nearly Meets Expectations
The title and introduction to the paper are critiqued, but not succinctly and clearly.
0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
The critique of the title and introduction to the paper is poorly written and/or missing elements.
1.75 / 2 pts
Analysis of Summary of Studies in the Introductory Material
2 pts
Meets Expectations
The supportive studies are succinctly critiqued according to the assignment guidelines.
1 pts
Nearly Meets Expectations
The supportive studies are critiqued, but not succinctly and clearly.
0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
The critique of the supportive studies is poorly written and/or missing elements.
2 / 2 pts
Discussion of Hypothesis and Research Questions of Study
2 pts
Meets Expectations
The research hypotheses and research questions are succinctly critiqued according to the assignment guidelines.
1 pts
Nearly Meets Expectations
The research hypotheses and research questions are critiqued, but not succinctly and clearly.
0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
The critique of the research hypotheses and research questions is poorly written and/or missing elements.
0.5 / 2 pts
Discussion of Variables
2 pts
Meets Expectations
The variables of the study are succinctly critiqued according to the assignment guidelines.
1 pts
Nearly Meets Expectations
The variables of the study are critiqued, but not succinctly and clearly.
0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
The critique of the variables of the study is poorly written and/or missing elements.
1 / 2 pts
Discussion of Population and Sampling
2 pts
Meets Expectations
The population and sampling procedures are succinctly critiqued according to the assignment guidelines.
1 pts
Nearly Meets Expectations
The population and sampling procedures are critiqued, but not succinctly and clearly.
0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
The critique of the population and sampling procedures is poorly written and/or missing elements.
0 / 2 pts
Discussion of Instruments and Reliability and Validity
2 pts
Meets Expectations
The instruments used to measure variables are succinctly critiqued according to the assignment guidelines.
1 pts
Nearly Meets Expectations
The instruments used to measure variables are critiqued, but not succinctly and clearly.
0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
The critique of the instruments used to measure variables is poorly written and/or missing elements.
0.5 / 2 pts
Discussion of Statistical Procedures
2 pts
Meets Expectations
The statistical analysis procedures are succinctly critiqued according to the assignment guidelines.
1 pts
Nearly Meets Expectations
The statistical analysis procedures are critiqued, but not succinctly and clearly.
0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
The critique of the statistical analysis procedures is poorly written and/or missing elements.
0 / 2 pts
Discussion of Data and Results
2 pts
Meets Expectations
The results of the study and the scholarly presentation are succinctly critiqued according to the assignment guidelines.
1 pts
Nearly Meets Expectations
The results of the study and the scholarly presentation are critiqued, but not succinctly and clearly.
0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
The critique of the results of the study and the scholarly presentation is poorly written and/or missing elements.
1 / 2 pts
Documentation and Mechanics
4 to >3 pts
Meets Expectations
APA format and references are correct. Professional written communication and correct grammar are used. Adheres to the page limit.
3 to >1 pts
Nearly Meets Expectations
APA format and references have some errors. Some errors in written communication and grammar. Goes one page over the limit.
1 to >0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
APA format and references have numerous and distracting errors. Written communication and grammar lack professionalism. Does not adhere to the page limit by two or more pages.
