Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Validity is the main extent to which a concept, conclusion, or measurement is well-founded and likely corresponds accurately to the real world. [1] [2] The word "valid" is derived from the Latin validus, meaning strong.
A systematic review is a scholarly synthesis of the evidence on a clearly presented topic using critical methods to identify, define and assess research on the topic. [1] A systematic review extracts and interprets data from published studies on the topic (in the scientific literature), then analyzes, describes, critically appraises and summarizes interpretations into a refined evidence-based ...
Construct validity concerns how well a set of indicators represent or reflect a concept that is not directly measurable. [1] [2] [3] Construct validation is the accumulation of evidence to support the interpretation of what a measure reflects.
Scientific literature encompasses a vast body of academic papers that spans various disciplines within the natural and social sciences. It primarily consists of academic papers that present original empirical research and theoretical contributions.
[1] [2] A valid causal inference may be made when three criteria are satisfied: the "cause" precedes the "effect" in time (temporal precedence), the "cause" and the "effect" tend to occur together (covariation), and; there are no plausible alternative explanations for the observed covariation (nonspuriousness). [2]
A rule of inference is valid if, when applied to true premises, the conclusion cannot be false. A particular argument is valid if it follows a valid rule of inference. Deductive arguments that do not follow a valid rule of inference are called formal fallacies: the truth of their premises does not ensure the truth of their conclusion. [18] [14]
A literature review is an overview of the previously published works on a topic. The term can refer to a full scholarly paper or a section of a scholarly work such as a book, or an article. Either way, a literature review is supposed to provide the researcher /author and the audiences with a general image of the existing knowledge on the topic ...
The corresponding conditional of a valid argument is a logical truth and the negation of its corresponding conditional is a contradiction. The conclusion is a necessary consequence of its premises. An argument that is not valid is said to be "invalid". An example of a valid (and sound) argument is given by the following well-known syllogism: