Comparing Study Designs for Citation Bias

By analyzing the different statements in this worksheet, I can clearly comprehend that being bias can have negative or positive influence over the thoughts, perspectives, and judgments of the reader. Thus, this activity enhanced my skills in identifying & describing authors’ bias. Solving this worksheet made

Avoiding research bias in studies is important to the development of objective, reliable information that can be used by the public. Check all of the situations that are likely to indicate research bias:

Throughout my research, a challenge I encountered was the fact that some of the articles I encountered seemed to included biases within them especially with the primary view of

Interrogating construct validity, how well the variables in the study were manipulated and measured, is also essential when dealing with causal claims (Morling, 2012). Again, because so little information from the methods section was addressed in Bergland's (2014) article, readers cannot validate the construct validly of the study. It would have been

Serious questions have also been raised regarding the bias behind many of the trials that define evidence-based medicine. "A study reported in 2004 showed that when researchers looked into the qualifications of the authors of studies published in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) and the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), considered to be two of the most prestigious medical journals, up to 32% of them had undisclosed conflicts of interest" (Torrey 2012:1).

Another research method that is presented is unrepresented bias. Unrepresented bias is when the participants of the study do not represent an accurate population. In the first study, Dr. Sarpal surveyed only cyclists. As a result, most cyclists rewarded themselves by eating chocolate, which increased their motivation to do the task. Being cyclists, they are already considered “good” at the task, therefore they will have better results and most likely they do not need the added incentive of chocolate to improve, though it is not unwelcomed. In the second study, the group was made up of volunteers, most of which were not cyclists, and only half of them were receiving chocolate; this was their major motivator. They had nothing to gain out of performing

Whereas it is accepted by this particular analyst that this process is not one that the press is likely to engage in, by very nature of the way in which the press makes money and generates advertising, it is possible to encourage a further level of overview, oversight, review, and analysis on the part of individuals involved in the peer review process of scholarly journals (Purssell 835). As indicated previously, as a result of the fact that the peer review process failed on Wakefield’s submission, it was not until after publication that the article came to be widely analyze and reconsidered by individuals within the medical community. To the credit of the process, the article was eventually discredited and further analysis revealed the fact that there was not a definitive or clear linkage between autism and the administration of the MMR vaccine. Yet, the process could have been effected in a more reasonable manner had the peer reviewers of the article demanded a further level of proof and validation of the results prior to clearing it for publication. In a perfect world, this process is without any drawbacks. However, it is clearly understood by this author that there are many aspects of current scholarly journals that are not analyzed with due diligence; either as a result of the fact that the reviewers overlook the information with no direct intention or they are simply too overwhelmed and lazy to fact check all of the information they are presented

Methodology biases in research do occur, which can make individuals question scientific evidence’s credibility, but critical analysis of these method biases has been repeatedly assessed to identify frameworks that

The present report argues that the 3 identified sources, are published in high-ranked journals and based on sufficient patient population, thereby constituting a strong research evidence for addressing the established research question.

Scientific research is a process to discover truth. This process begins with the researcher developing a theory on a phenomenon which is formed into a hypothesis. A hypothesis is defined as an educated guess about a relationship between variables which is then further examined. This research process can be distorted by social cognition biases. Social biases are belief perseverance, confirmation bias, and availability heuristic. Confirmation bias and availability heuristic are the two social cognition biases that can lead to errors in research. This leads the researcher to ignore information that does not endorse their beliefs known as confirmation bias and/or overestimate the occurrence of events in their research to make their research more relevant known as availability heuristic.

Note: Remember to view the information you have obtained for potential bias. This is from the perspective of your own bias to the research and the bias of the authors who compiled the data and the research you gathered. In other words, do not discount the importance of other’s data because of your own bias(is).

The big idea of “How to Read a Paper: The Basics of Evidence-Based Medicine” is that it describes the different types of clinical research reporting, and explains how to critically appraise the publications. The book provides the tools to find and evaluate the literature, and implement the findings in an evidence-based, patient-centered way. It is written for anyone in the health care professions who has little or no knowledge of evidence-based medicine; it provides a clear understanding of the concepts and how to put them into practice at the basic, clinical level.

In order to conduct the unbiased research, researchers have to be cautious about conducting of research in an unbiased and neutral way. Therefore, researchers follow different methods and techniques to conduct research in order to bring the best and presentable results. In this essay, the paper would present the research steps that may help learners for conducting research and try to critically analyze them. Further, it would identify the major assumptions and bias of the drug industry that underlie drug usage. It will also present the personal bias that a consumer has on the drug industry and underlies the drug research. Presentation of the paper will also identify

An essential part to a good research plan that will result in a completed dissertation is having reliable information that will support the need for the research topic in the first place (2004). Trochim (2006) discussed validity of information variable relationships in regards to their validity being conclusive, internal construct or external; or a combination of the four based on the researchers observations. Articles critiques require researchers’ to locate scholarly information that could potentially relate to their research topic. The literature review relationship with the research topic is essential; in that it might provide the bases for additional research in a particular area. The literature review can expand manuscript quality and peer reviewing abilities potentially improving the acceptance of the completed work (Kulage, & Larson, 2016).

By conducting an empirical review on previously published findings, the researcher intends to find out whether the currently used methods are effective, and possibly introduce a new concept/ argument to the current existing discussion.