The purpose of this instrument is to evaluate a social cognitive theory-based on condom use a method of birth control in undergraduate college students. Research studies have been done to measure the number of people who use condoms as a form of contraception (Critelli & Suire, 1998). Research studies show condom use and other prevention methods can reduce the spread of Sexually Transmitted Diseases (STD), and protect against pregnancy (Critelli & Suire, 1998). The Combination of Other Forms of Birth Control and Short Term Monogamy study was reviewed as a comparison to the purpose of instrument measure I created. The study focused on correlation between condom use and the use of other forms of birth control at last intercourse (Critelli & Suire,
…show more content…
The feedback helped to correct any errors that I missed in my instrument or need to edit. I made changes to my instrument as needed. Each member in my group expressed their thoughts about my instrument, and provided educational feedback based on what was taught in class meetings and examples from our textbook. The items on my survey instrument needed to be adjusted to a 5 point scale using the Likert-type scale. The score ranges for each of the constructs was 1-Strongly Agree, 2-Agree, 3- Neutral, 4-Disagree, 5-Strongly Disagree. The changes made in my instrument are based on my peers’ feedback. According to Sharma and Petosa (2014), “Limitations of an evaluation are restrictions and conditions placed on the interpretation of evaluation results when elements of evaluation design reduce scientific rigor” (p. # 289). Limitations are imperfections in the evaluation methods that should be measured when understanding the results. The usage of these tools can provide better understanding and context for statistical results of an evaluation (Sharma &Petosa, 2014 p. …show more content…
A panel of experts is needed to review the instrument, and determined the validity and reliability. The group discussion was an example of panel of experts, who determined the content of validity and reliability between the items composing in the instrument. The reliability was conducted before the expert panel review, which for this assignment were my classmates. The panel of experts provided suggestions with regard to improving the instrument’s readability (Sharma & Petosa, 2014). My classmates provides suggestions to improve my
The feedback helped to correct any errors that I missed in my instrument or need to edit. I made changes to my instrument as needed. Each member in my group expressed their thoughts about my instrument, and provided educational feedback based on what was taught in class meetings and examples from our textbook. The items on my survey instrument needed to be adjusted to a 5 point scale using the Likert-type scale. The score ranges for each of the constructs was 1-Strongly Agree, 2-Agree, 3- Neutral, 4-Disagree, 5-Strongly Disagree. The changes made in my instrument are based on my peers’ feedback. According to Sharma and Petosa (2014), “Limitations of an evaluation are restrictions and conditions placed on the interpretation of evaluation results when elements of evaluation design reduce scientific rigor” (p. # 289). Limitations are imperfections in the evaluation methods that should be measured when understanding the results. The usage of these tools can provide better understanding and context for statistical results of an evaluation (Sharma &Petosa, 2014 p. …show more content…
A panel of experts is needed to review the instrument, and determined the validity and reliability. The group discussion was an example of panel of experts, who determined the content of validity and reliability between the items composing in the instrument. The reliability was conducted before the expert panel review, which for this assignment were my classmates. The panel of experts provided suggestions with regard to improving the instrument’s readability (Sharma & Petosa, 2014). My classmates provides suggestions to improve my