Whether in a scholarly or practitioner setting, good research and data analysis should have the benefit of peer feedback. For this Discussion, you will perform an article critique on ANOVA testing. Be sure and remember that the goal is to obtain constructive feedback to improve the research and its interpretation, so please view this as an opportunity to learn from one another.
To prepare for this Discussion:

Review the Learning      Resources and the media programs related to ANOVA testing.
Search for and select a      quantitative article specific to your discipline and related to ANOVA      testing. Help with this task may be found in the Course guide and      assignment help linked in this week’s Learning Resources. Also, you can      use as guide the Research Design Alignment Table located in this week’s      Learning Resources.

8210 Week 7 Discussion:
Research Design for One-Way ANOVA
Whether in a scholarly or practitioner setting, good research and data analysis should have the benefit of peer feedback. For this Discussion, you will perform an article critique on ANOVA testing. Be sure and remember that the goal is to obtain constructive feedback to improve the research and its interpretation, so please view this as an opportunity to learn from one another.

To prepare for this Discussion:

· Review the Learning Resources and the media programs related to ANOVA testing.
· Search for and select a quantitative article specific to your discipline and related to ANOVA testing. Help with this task may be found in the Course guide and assignment help linked in this week’s Learning Resources. Also, you can use as guide the Research Design Alignment Table located in this week’s Learning Resources.

Assignment Task Part 1

Write a 5-paragraphs critique of the article. In your critique, include responses to the following:
1. Which is the research design used by the authors?
2. Why did the authors use ANOVA test?
3. Do you think it’s the most appropriate choice? Why or why not?
4. Did the authors display the data?
5. Do the results stand alone? Why or why not?
6. Did the authors report effect size? If yes, is this meaningful?
Be sure to support your Main Post and Response Post with reference to the week’s Learning Resources and other scholarly evidence in APA Style.
           .

Be sure to support your Main Post and Response Post with reference to the week’s Learning Resources and other scholarly evidence in APA Style.

Assignment Task Part 2

Respond to one of your colleagues’ posts in 150 words of the following:
1. Make recommendations for the design choice.
2. Explain whether you think that this is the appropriate test to use for the research question. Why or why not?
3. As a lay reader, were you able to understand the results and their implications? Why or why not?

Learning Resources
Required Readings
Frankfort-Nachmias, C., Leon-Guerrero, A., & Davis, G. (2020). Social statistics for a diverse society (9th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
· Chapter 11, “Analysis of Variance” (pp. 373-399)
Wagner, III, W. E. (2020). Using IBM® SPSS® statistics for research methods and social science statistics (7th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
· Chapter 10, “Analysis of Variance”
· Chapter 11, “Editing Output” (previously read in Week 2, 3, 4, 5. and 6)

Walden University Library. (n.d.). Course Guide and Assignment Help for RSCH 8210. Retrieved from http://academicguides.waldenu.edu/rsch8210
For help with this week’s research, see this Course Guide and related weekly assignment resources.

Document: Walden University: Research Design Alignment Table

Datasets
Your instructor will post the datasets for the course in the Doc Sharing section and in an Announcement. Your instructor may also recommend using a different dataset from the ones provided here.
R

Assignment Task Part 2

Respond to one of your colleagues’ posts in
125 words
of the following:
1. Make recommendations for the design choice.
2. Explain whether you think that this is the appropriate ANOVA test to use for the research question. Why or why not?
3. As a lay reader, were you able to understand the results and their implications? Why or why not?

Romel Jimera 

Top of Form
Amilia and Nurmalia (2020) used a descriptive study to investigate the difference in patient safety competencies between the classroom and clinical settings. The 181 nursing students were selected using a stratified random sampling with 63 third-year students, 69 fourth-year students, and 49 clinical nursing students. The authors employed the Health Professional Safety Survey to determine student knowledge of the patient safety elements. They analyzed the demographic data descriptively and utilized a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) test, aside from the paired t-test and the independent t-test, to assess the differences between study years and patient safety parameters.
This study aimed to determine if there are variations between the classroom and clinical learning for nursing students. The authors used the t-test to compare the classroom learning differences between the two groups. Meanwhile, the one-way ANOVA test was appropriate for finding the difference among the three groups. ANOVA is commonly used when the study compares three or more groups (Frankfort-Nachmias et al., 2021). 

Table 1. Comparing the scores in clinical learning among student groups (Amilia & Nurmilia, 2020)

The omnibus test showed a statistically significant difference in clinical learning with p<.05 in all three groups, thus rejecting the null hypothesis. The authors did not identify if a post hoc test was used. One of the ANOVA assumptions, homogeneity, is that the variances between groups should be comparable (Frankfort-Nachmias et al., 2021). Consequently, in this case, the ANOVA test was only employed in clinical learning, while a t-test was utilized in classroom learning due to having only two groups. Further, the authors did not report the effect size, which they should have since the clinical sample size is uniquely smaller than the classroom sample size. Table 2.  Comparing the score between the classroom and clinical learning (Amilia & Nurmilla, 2020)      Null hypothesis: There is no difference in the mean of patient safety competencies among the group.       Alternative hypothesis: At least one group differs significantly from the overall dependent variable means. Five out of seven patient safety domains have a p-value of <.05, rejecting the null hypothesis. The results stand alone in finding the difference in patient safety competencies between the classroom and clinical learning using the paired t-test, ANOVA, and independent t-test. Among the seven elements of patient safety competence, "clinical safety" (M = 4.36, p = 0.002) and "communicate effectively" (M =




Why Choose Us

  • 100% non-plagiarized Papers
  • 24/7 /365 Service Available
  • Affordable Prices
  • Any Paper, Urgency, and Subject
  • Will complete your papers in 6 hours
  • On-time Delivery
  • Money-back and Privacy guarantees
  • Unlimited Amendments upon request
  • Satisfaction guarantee

How it Works

  • Click on the “Place Order” tab at the top menu or “Order Now” icon at the bottom and a new page will appear with an order form to be filled.
  • Fill in your paper’s requirements in the "PAPER DETAILS" section.
  • Fill in your paper’s academic level, deadline, and the required number of pages from the drop-down menus.
  • Click “CREATE ACCOUNT & SIGN IN” to enter your registration details and get an account with us for record-keeping and then, click on “PROCEED TO CHECKOUT” at the bottom of the page.
  • From there, the payment sections will show, follow the guided payment process and your order will be available for our writing team to work on it.