Confounding variables

Respond to at least two colleagues by explaining how that colleague might rule out one of the confounding variables that they identified.

Respond to following 2 students:

Andres

RE: Discussion – Week 4

Case Study Interpretation

In the given case, The Chi-Square examination comprised of 60 individuals that were separated into two groups. One group involved 30 members represented as the intervention group, and the other 30 members were considered the correlation groups (Plummer, Makris, and Brocksen, 2014). The study’s purpose was to classify if the “vocational rehabilitation intervention programs” are successful in helping people get work. Based on the given information on the output charts, those who participated in the vocational rehab program had a substantially higher rate finding full-time work than those on the waiting list -the comparison group.

Factors Limiting Internal and External Validity

In any study, it is essential to verify its accuracy or validity. The legitimacy or validity is

characterized as the degree to which an idea is precisely estimated in a quantitative report. For instance, a review intended to investigate depression; however, which really measures anxiety would not be viewed as legitimate (Dudley, 2014; Twycross & Shields, 2004). Therefore, considering the restricting internal validity of the presented study may incorporate nonrandomized appointed members, and the potential contrast between the groups was because of previous variances among the members. For precise validity, the more a measure is substantial, the better the investigation (Dudley, 2014). For instance, one crucial factor to keep in mind is the vocational rehab members’ consistency in a given week.

Cause and Effect Relationship

The above variables may limit the capacity to make an inference concerning cause and effect relationship since the researchers must conclude if the improvement is evident in the outcome result during the time of execution (Dudley, 2014). One must consider the following three conditions before concluding a casual relationship: the program intervention must precede the client’s improve results; an association should be found between the introduction of the mediation and the client’s enhancement for the result proportions of the individual; and finally, the reason of the outcome or improvement should not be attributed to some of the other factors outside of the intervention. An example of an outside factor that may influence the results is when an individual may be attending other support groups that have enhanced the client’s outcome and not necessarily the intervention directly impacting the individual’s life.

References

Dudley, J. R. (2014). Social work evaluation: Enhancing what we do. (2nd ed.) Chicago, IL: Lyceum Books.

Plummer, S.-B., Makris, S., & Brocksen S. (Eds.). (2014b). Social work case studies: Concentration year. Baltimore, MD: Laureate International Universities Publishing. [Vital Source e-reader].

Twycross, A., & Shields, L. (2004). Validity and reliability – What’s it all about? Paediatric Nursing, 16(10), 36–36.

Respond to following student:

Tanisha

RE: Discussion – Week 4

Top of Form

Post an interpretation of the case study’s conclusion that “the vocational rehabilitation intervention program may be effective at promoting full-time employment”

When reviewing the Chi Square research study results in regards to employment and those that are incarcerated, the study looked at inmates that participated in the vocational rehabilitation program versus those who have not participated in the program, to see if the program was successful in obtaining employment after the inmates were released from jail (Plummer et. Al, 2014b). The study used 60 inmates, 1 of which did not supply any information, where 30 of the participants received the vocational training and 29 did not (Plummer et. Al, 2014b). The study looked at the percentages of each group (intervention group vs. comparison group) that did not have employment, had part-time employment, and had full time employment and compared their findings together to see if the outcomes found the difference to be significant enough to show that the intervention was effective or not (Plummer et. Al, 2014b). 60% of the participants in the training were found to be employed full time, 23% were part-time, and 17% were unemployed whereas those that did not participate in the training had 21% who were employed full-time, 24% were part-time, and 55% were unemployed (Plummer et. Al, 2014b). Because the p value (the difference) was .003, which is beyond the average of .05 that researchers use to establish their interventions significance, this intervention was found to be an effective intervention (Plummer et. Al, 2014b).

Describe the factors limiting the internal validity of this study and explain why those factors limit the ability to draw conclusions regarding cause and effect relationships

The research identified two main limitations for the internal validity of this study and they are: 1. No random assignment was used, and 2. The differences (the p value) between the two groups could have been due to preexisting differences among the participants like selection bias (Plummer et. Al, 2014b). Yes, the study wanted to see if the intervention was effective or not and find a way to measure the effectiveness and outcomes, but when you do not think of potential limitations, it could decrease the validity of the study (Dudley, 2014). If the participants were chosen randomly, or you added a control group to the study, the numbers would provide more accuracy and validity because you take bias out of the equation and have more of a pure study where no one knows if the person did participate in training or not or what previous knowledge or experience each participate had prior to the study like if were they employed prior to being incarcerated (Dudley, 2014). A control group is a great way to have a group that is completely unbiased that can regulate the outcomes in a more accurate way as well because the measure is including many different factors not just one which will provide more accurate outcomes to determine whether or not that intervention really is effective or not (Dudley, 2014).

Dudley, J. R. (2014). Social work evaluation: Enhancing what we do. (2nd ed.) Chicago, IL: Lyceum Books.

Plummer, S.-B., Makris, S., & Brocksen S. (Eds.). (2014b). Social work case studies: Concentration year. Baltimore, MD: Laureate International Universities Publishing. [Vital Source e-reader].