Click on the following links. Please note these will open in a new window.

Journal Article 1: Koenig, J., Jarczok, M. N., Warth, M., Hillecke, T. K., & Thaer, J. F. (2014). The Quick Inventory of Pain Symptoms (QIPS): A first evaluation on concurrent validity and sex differences. SAGE Open, online access. doi:10.1177/2158244014556626

Learning Objectives: 3-3: How to identify different scales of measurement. | 3-4: Different types of measures including questionnaires, unobtrusive, and physiological measures. | 3-5: How to assess the reliability and validity of measures.

Summary: Evaluation of the Quick Inventory of Pain Symptoms (QIPS)

Questions to Consider:

1. What was the authors’ rationale for creating the QIPS?
2. The QIPS is measured on an interval scale of measurement. How can you tell this is the scale of measurement?
3. How did the authors’ test the concurrent validity of the QIPS?

Journal Article 2: Da Silva, S. P. (2012). Validity and reliability of a classroom heart-rate collection procedure, with application for assessing arousal related to test application. Psychology of Learning and Teaching, 11, 186–193. doi:10.2304/plat.2012.11.2.186

Learning Objectives: 3-3: How to identify different scales of measurement. | 3-4: Different types of measures including questionnaires, unobtrusive, and physiological measures. | 3-5: How to assess the reliability and validity of measures.

Summary: Results of two studies examining the measurement reliability and validity of a heart-rate collection procedure

Questions to Consider:

1. In Study 1, how did the author assess the test-retest reliability of the heart-rate collection procedure? What were the results?
2. In Study 1, how did the author test the construct validity of the heart-rate collection procedure? What were the results?
3. In Study 2, how did the author test the construct validity of the heart-rate collection procedure? What were the results?

Journal Article 3:

Avellar, S. A., Thomas, J., Kleinman, R., Sama-Miller, E., Woodruff, S. E., Coughlin, R., & Westbrook, T. R. (2016). External validity: The next step for systemic reviews? Evaluation Review, 41, 283–325. doi:10.1177/0193841X16665199

Learning Objective: 3-6: How to evaluate the reliability and validity of a study.

Summary: Considers how review articles evaluate the external validity of studies. The authors argue that systematic reviews focus on internal validity but do not pay enough attention to external validity.

Questions to Consider:

1. What are the challenges to consistently assessing external validity across multiple studies?
2. What three categories of external validity did the authors examine for this study? How did they examine these categories?
3. What were the results of the study?