In order to thoroughly assess and evaluate the research conducted and results obtained during a secondary investigation, factors such as relevancy, accuracy, validity and reliability must be considered. These factors can alter the final results or conclusions of the investigation.
Assessing the relevancy, accuracy, validity and reliability of primary and secondary data
Throughout my research process, I have maintained the reliability of the results obtained by testing each source used for its currency, how relevant it is to my topic and in addressing my inquiry question, the authority of the author/s or organisation, the accuracy of the information presented and the purpose of the source, author/s and organisation. In order to test for these factors, I applied a range of questions, including;
- When was the information published and has it been updated since?
- Does the information hold direct relevance to the topic of interest?
- Who is the author/ publisher of the information and what are their credentials?
- Can the information presented by verified across a range of other sources (cross-referencing)?
- What is the main purpose of this source?
By applying these comprehensive techniques, I was able to collect information that held direct relevancy to the topic I was investigating, a factor that was heightened through my development of specific investigation areas when conducting my background research. Obtaining relevant data ensured that I was able to comprehensively and directly answer my inquiry question as I developed an extensive understanding of all areas of my topic.
Furthermore, in order to assess the accuracy of the information I collected, I tested for any bias and ensured the information presented was unanimous across other sources by employing the technique of cross-referencing.
In order to maintain reliability and validity, I used sources written by individuals, predominantly medical professionals, whose work specialises in the specific field that I was investigating. I also accessed government or government endorsed websites or organisations as the information is immediately credible, reputable and valid. Additionally, I predominately accessed journal articles that were often peer-reviewed and published on trusted databases such as GALE, Science Direct, the National Library of Medicine and the EBSCO databases.
By extracting both qualitative and quantitative data, I was able to provide altering insight into the modifiable risk factors of osteoporosis and its debilitating consequences as well as surrounding areas, comprehensively addressing my inquiry question. This was completed through the utilisation of an abundance of varied sources such as films, videos, articles, journal and/ or peer-reviewed articles, reliable websites, printed media and government organisations. Relevancy, reliability, accuracy and validity was then further tested as I tested my research against the following questions:
- How consistent is the information with information from other reputable sources?
- Is the data presented based on repeatable processes/ results?
- Is this information similar to the information presented in peer-reviewed scientific journals?
- Do the findings relate to the inquiry question?
- Are the findings accurate and the source is reliable?
An additional step completed in my depth study was the completion of peer feedback, as discussed earlier, which provided necessary additional qualitative data. This was completed through both a survey regarding my yes/ no questions on my investigation and direct and specific feedback on my entire investigation. This feedback proved to be invaluable as it provided me with insight regarding what my depth study was lacking and how to improve it, which has since been acted upon.
Improving the relevancy, accuracy, validity and reliability of collected data
A way to improve the relevancy of the data collected for my depth study is to refine the date parameters of data that my testing, as previously described, allowed. Instead of including information created within the past 25 years, my data could have been more relevant, and as a result more accurate, reliable and valid, if it was created within the past 15 years. Furthermore, accuracy, reliability and validity could have all been improved in gathering additional and more in-depth responses from my peer feedback, however this has the potential to be unrealistic.
Identifying and assessing error, uncertainty and limitations in data
Although I did not encounter many errors in my investigation due to the vigorous testing I conducted on all my collected information (as discussed above), a major limitation I encountered while conducting my depth study was a lack of high level scientific-based articles and papers on my topic. This is because the majority of information available on the topic of osteoporosis is directed at a health consumer audience, rather than an in-depth scientific level research. As a consequence, I had to conduct much more in-depth and time consuming research in order to gain both perspectives of a health consumer, but more importantly, the high-level thinking provided in scientific-based research and articles. Due to the identification of this limitation and therefore the additional research conducted, I was able to overcome this limitation and collect relevant, accurate, valid and reliable primary and secondary data.
Additionally, I encountered uncertainty whilst conducting my investigation regarding the location of the information sourced. Whilst I originally aimed to collect information that was primarily created/ conducted in Australia, such as Osteoporosis Australia and Healthy Bones Australia, I found this extremely difficult to obtain the necessary depth. Therefore, I used information collected globally, ensuring that it was created recently. As a result of this, uncertainty arose regarding the validity of this information. In order to overcome this uncertainty, I conducted thorough research regarding the authority and credibility of the authors, publishers and organisations of websites.
Final Comments
Overall, my investigation, through my thorough research process that has proven to be invaluable, was highly reliable, accurate, relevant and valid. This is due to the techniques and tools implemented, as discussed above, that ensured this, ultimately meaning the results and conclusions drawn were extremely reliable.
