Research Problems and Hypotheses “A research problem is a discrepancy between what one knows and ought to know to solve a nursing problem”.
Sources of Research Problems • Experience • Technology • New roles of the nurse • Nursing Literature • Theories
EXPERIENCE • GRIPE • PROFESSIONAL WISHES • CURIOSITY • NEW PERSON/EXPERIENCE
TECHNOLOGY Monitoring Information technology
EXPANDING ROLES Nurse practitioners Community and home health nursing Advocate, teacher, counselor, etc.
LITERATURE Research Reports
Gaps in the literature • There may be areas , as revealed by a dearth of available literature on the topic that remain unexplored
REPLICATION No study can stand by itself, must be replicated for confidence in the results
SUGGESTED STUDIES Every research report suggests areas for continued study
INCONSISTENCIES Two studies on the same variables may produce different outcomes
THEORIES Must be tested in the real world through the formulation of research problems and hypotheses
CRITERIA FOR A “good” RESEARCH PROBLEM • 1. INTERESTING? • 2. RESEARCHABLE? • 3. FEASIBLE? PRACTICABLE? • 4. SIGNIFICANT? • 5. NURSING?
Interesting • This is a subjective criteria, the study must only be interesting to the person doing the study
Researchable • Variables should be precisely defined and measured and lead to an answer to the question • NB: “SHOULDNESS AND GOODNESS” questions not researchable
Feasible/Practicable • Can the study be done by the researcher? • Time? • Place? • Money? • Equipment? • Subjects? • Instruments to measure variables?
Significant • Will the results make a difference that matters to the profession? • Make a difference in patient care? • Add to professional practice knowledge? • Related to more general conceptual issues? • Is it an instance of a larger class of events? • Does it help support or build theory?
Nursing • Does nursing have access to or control over phenomenon in question--or is it reasonable to think that they will? (this is defined broadly)
Developing and Refining Research Problem • Define a specific problem area • Review the relevant literature • Examine the significance to nursing • Examine the feasibility
Defining the Problem Areas • Begin with broad topic area and narrow it down • Focus on the dependent variable
A first Review of the Literature • Define the problem in the context of the state of knowledge in the subject area
Significance • Contributes to and extends the body of scientific nursing knowledge
Feasibility • This must be pragmatically examined by the researcher in light of her own available expertise and resources
RESEARCH PROBLEMSTATEMENTS • AS BRIEF AS POSSIBLE • IDENTIFY KEY VARIABLES • SPECIFY NATURE OF POPULATION • SUGGEST METHODOLOGY • NARROW/SPECIFIC • DECLARATIVE or INTERROGATIVE
Declaritive • The purpose of this study is to……………… • The relationship between X and Y will be examined
Interrogative • What is the relationship between X and Y?
HYPOTHESIS • tentative prediction or explanation about the relationship between variables • Emanates from the ROL
Hypotheses • SIMPLE or COMPLEX (multivariate) • DIRECTIONAL or NONDIRECTIONAL
PURPOSES of HYPOTHESES GUIDES INQUIRY BY: • UNIFYING THEORY AND REALITY • EXTENDS KNOWLEDGE • GIVES DIRECTION TO RESEARCH
CHARACTERISTICS of a good hypothesis • SPECIFIES RELATIONSHIP • TESTABLE • JUSTIFIABLE • CONCISE
Research Hypothesis • Indicates what the actual outcome of the study is expected to be • Supported when the researcher obtains a statistically significant finding
Statistical or Null Hypothesis • States “There is no relationship between the dependent and independent variables” • Failure to reject the null hypothesis implies that there is insufficient evidence to support the idea of a real difference in the dependent variable
Type I error • The rejection of a null hypothesis that is actually true--or saying a treatment works when it does not.
Type II error • The acceptance of a null hypothesis that is actually false, or saying a treatment doesn’t work when it really does.
Level of Significance=p • Set by the researcher in consideration of the seriousness of the consequences of making a mistake in accepting a “false” research hypothesis
LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE • .05---FIVE CHANCES IN 100 OF MAKING A MISTAKE IN ACCEPTING RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS (when it is actually “false”) • (TYPE I ERROR MORE LIKELY)
LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE • .01---ONE CHANCE IN 100 OF MAKING A MISTAKE IN ACCEPTING THE RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS (when it is actually “false”)
LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE • .001--ONE CHANCE IN 1000 OF MAKING A MISTAKE IN ACCEPTING RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS • (TYPE II ERROR MORE LIKELY)