Title

Tracing the effects of participant selection on research integrity and consumer recommendations

Presenter Information

Diana Bailey, Tufts University

Start Time

28-10-2005 4:00 PM

End Time

28-10-2005 5:40 PM

Abstract

Using a study concerning the occupation of homemaking by couples, the effects of a particular participant selection method will be traced throughout ensuing data gathering and analysis, to its ultimate effect on recommendations made to readers. In the homemaking study, purposive sampling was unsuccessful, prompting authors to use the snowball method to recruit participants. This led to a group of couples with more limited demographics than originally planned which, in turn, affected the findings and suggestions that were communicated to readers.

Upon reflection, we wondered if occupational therapy studies shared this outcome in common with occupational science studies. To find out, the last five years of the American Journal of Occupational Therapy and the Journal of Occupational Science were examined. Results of this review will be shared.

The presentation will be framed such that discussion will center on the following questions:

  • Should there be more open debate about participant selection methods – difficulties and possibilities?
  • Is there a need to more closely examine our participants’ demographics and to make those demographics more transparent for readers?
  • Can readers trust that authors have carefully and accurately generalized their findings about occupational participation?
  • Are there increasing expectations that occupational science studies will be related to occupational therapy practice?
  • Are occupational therapy practitioners placing an undue burden on occupational scientists when asking them to relate their studies to practice?

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS
 
Oct 28th, 4:00 PM Oct 28th, 5:40 PM

Tracing the effects of participant selection on research integrity and consumer recommendations

Using a study concerning the occupation of homemaking by couples, the effects of a particular participant selection method will be traced throughout ensuing data gathering and analysis, to its ultimate effect on recommendations made to readers. In the homemaking study, purposive sampling was unsuccessful, prompting authors to use the snowball method to recruit participants. This led to a group of couples with more limited demographics than originally planned which, in turn, affected the findings and suggestions that were communicated to readers.

Upon reflection, we wondered if occupational therapy studies shared this outcome in common with occupational science studies. To find out, the last five years of the American Journal of Occupational Therapy and the Journal of Occupational Science were examined. Results of this review will be shared.

The presentation will be framed such that discussion will center on the following questions:

  • Should there be more open debate about participant selection methods – difficulties and possibilities?
  • Is there a need to more closely examine our participants’ demographics and to make those demographics more transparent for readers?
  • Can readers trust that authors have carefully and accurately generalized their findings about occupational participation?
  • Are there increasing expectations that occupational science studies will be related to occupational therapy practice?
  • Are occupational therapy practitioners placing an undue burden on occupational scientists when asking them to relate their studies to practice?