Running Head: GROUP CRITIQUE

UNIVERSITY OF THE SOUTHERN CARIBBEAN

MARACAS ROYAL ROAD, MARACAS ST. JOSEPH, TRINIDAD

Critique

An Assignment
Prepared in Partial Fulfilment
For the Requirement of the Course
Nurs104 – Introduction to Nursing Research

Instructor: Dr. Lydia Campbell – George

By
Christy-Ann Melville
Marika Diaz
Gabriella De Leon
Hemra Beckles
Chantelle Huggins
Daniel Spring
Alimah Bynoe
Christal Scott

15th March, 2021

Approved ________________
Running Head: GROUP CRITIQUE
1

Problem Statement and Purpose Questions

1. What is the problem and/or purpose of the research study?

 The primary purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of college

student’s perceptions of the risk of pregnancy and sexually transmitted disease on

contraceptive practice.

2. Does the problem or purpose statement express a relationship between two or more

variables? If so, what is/are the relationship(s)? Are they testable?

 Yes, the relationship between increased knowledge of contraception and STDs

and healthy behavior changes. Yes, they are testable

3. Does the problem statement and/or purpose specify the nature of the population being

studied? What is it?

 Yes , 377 undergraduate students were taken from California State University,

Fresno during the fall 1997 and spring 1998 semesters.

4. What significance of the problem, if any, has the investigator identified?

 The college student sexual behavior will help health education professionals

develop health education programs that effectively focus attention on high-risk

sexual behaviors.
Running Head: GROUP CRITIQUE
1

Review of Literate and Theoretical Framework

1. What concepts are included in the review? Of particular importance, note those concepts

that are the independent and dependent variables and how they are conceptually defined.

 The concepts included in the review were; the sexual behaviours of college

students, the actual and perceived pregnancy and STD risks to those students, the

contraceptive practices of college students and the effectiveness of various

attempts to produce change in students’ sexually behaviours. Of these, only the

sexual behaviours of college students is an independent variable. the others are

dependent.

2. Does the literature review make the relationships among the variables explicit or place

the variables within a theoretical/conceptual framework? What are the relationships?

 The literature review places the variables within a theoretical framework.

3. What gaps or conflicts in knowledge of the problem are identified?

 One conflict pointed out in the literature review was that a woman may have a

different perception of what constitutes monogamy and put herself at risk by

believing that unprotected sex in a particular relationship is safer. However, her

male partner may not perceive this relationship as exclusive and in return the

women may engage in similar levels of risky behavior, but still perceive it as less

risk in their sexual situations.

Running Head: GROUP CRITIQUE
1

Hypothesis or Research Questions

1. What hypothesis or research questions are stated in the study?

This study took three basic problems into consideration.

The first was the effect of pregnancy risk on contraceptive practices.

 Hypothesis 1: There is no significant difference between the use of contraception

and a history of unplanned pregnancy.

 Hypothesis 2: There is no significant difference between the use of combined

contraceptive methods and a history of unplanned pregnancy and/or a history of

STD infection.

The second problem involved the relationship between sexually transmitted disease risk

and contraceptive practices.

 Hypothesis 3: There is no significant difference between the use of contraception

and a personal history of STD infection.

 Hypothesis 4: There is no significant, difference between age, ethnicity and

marital status and the use of condoms for protection of STD infection.

The third problem explored the relationships of sexual behaviors and personal STD

history, students’ attitudes about contraception and perceived susceptibility of STD

infection.

 Hypothesis 5: There is no significant difference between age at first intercourse

and a history of STD infection.

Running Head: GROUP CRITIQUE
1

 Hypothesis 6: There is no significant difference in attitudes about contraceptive

issues among gender age and ethnic groups.

 Hypothesis 7: There is no significant difference between age, gender and marital

status and perceived susceptibility of STD or HIV/AIDS infection.

2. If research questions are stated, are they used in addition to hypothesis or to guide an

exploratory study?

 In this research study, the research questions were not stated but they were used in

addition to the hypothesis. In addition, their findings were incorporated in the

results and discussion chapters of the thesis.

3. What are the independent and dependent variables in the statement of each hypothesis or

research questions?

 Hypotheses 1 through 2 explored the links between pregnancy risk and

contraceptive use.

 Dependent variable- Pregnancy risk

 Independent Variable- Contraceptive use.

 Hypotheses 3 through 4 expressed a link between sexually transmitted disease

risk and contraceptive practices.

 Dependent variable- sexually transmitted disease risk

 Independent Variable- Contraceptive practice

 Hypotheses 5 through 7 expressed a link personal STD History and sexual

behaviours.
Running Head: GROUP CRITIQUE
1

 Dependent variable- personal STD History

 Independent Variable- sexual behaviours.

Sample

1. How was the sample selected?

 This sampling methodology was selected because of the accessibility of the target

population and the ease of administration. Undergraduate students attending

CSUF were considered representative of the college population enrolled in a

public university.

2. What type of sampling method was used? Is it appropriate to the design?

 The sample method that was used was cluster method, and yes it was appropriate

for the design.

3. Does the sample reflect the population as identified in the problem or purpose statement?

 Yes, the sample do reflect the population as identified in the problem or purpose

statement.
Running Head: GROUP CRITIQUE
1

Research Design

1. What type of research design is used?

 Quantitative research design was used.

2. Does the design seem to flow from the proposed research problem, theoretical

framework, literature review and hypothesis?

 Yes

3. What types of data collection methods are used in the study?

 Survey data collection method was used.

4. Are the data-collection procedures similar for all subjects?

 Yes, the data-collection procedures are similar for all subjects.

5. How have the rights of subjects been protected?

 The rights of subjects have been protected by only utilizing students enrolled in

general education courses for this study, because these students were taught to be

representatives of the university body.

6. What indications are given that informed consent of the subjects has been ensured?

 The indications given that informed consent of the subjects has been ensured is

that an effort was made to provide an understanding of the students’ sexual

Running Head: GROUP CRITIQUE
1

practices, their social attitudes about family planning and their knowledge of

contraception.

Instruments

1. Physiological measurement - Is a rationale given for why a particular instrument is being

used? If so, what is it? What provision is made for maintaining the accuracy of the

instrument and its use, if any?

 A self – report rationale was used so that the students participating in the survey

would have their privacy. There was no provision made mention for maintaining

the accuracy of the instrument.

2. Observational Method – Who did the observing? How were the observers trained to

minimized bias? Was there an observational guide? Were there observers required to

make inference about what they saw? Is there any reason to believe that the presence of

the observers affected the behaviour of the subjects?

 The person doing the observing was the students’ class instructor. The observers

were trained to minimize bias by ensuring that participation was completely

voluntary. No observational guide was stated. Nowhere stated that the observers

were required to make inference about what they saw. There is no reason to

believe that the presence of the observers affected the behaviour of the subjects.

3. Interviews – Who were the interviewers? How were they trained to minimize bias? Is

there any evidence of any interview bias? If so, what was it?
Running Head: GROUP CRITIQUE
1

 Because this study conducted a study there were no interviews. No interviewers

were present/needed so no evidence of interviews bias was recorded.

Analysis of data

1. What level of measurement is used to measure each of the major variables?

 The level of measurement used to measure each of the major variables was the

ordinal level.

2. What descriptive or inferential statistics are reported?

 The descriptive statistic reported was percentages.

3. Were these descriptive or inferential statistics appropriate to the level of measurement for

each variable?

 Yes, the descriptive statistic, percentages, was appropriate to the level of

measurement for each variable.

Conclusion

1. If hypothesis testing was done, was/were the hypotheses supported or not supported?

 Yes, hypothesis testing was done and out of the seven two were supported.

2. Are the results interrupted in the context of the problem/purpose, hypothesis and

theoretical framework/literature review?

 Yes, the results interrupted in the context of the problem/purpose, hypothesis and

theoretical framework/literature were reviewed.

Running Head: GROUP CRITIQUE
1

3. What relevance for nursing practice does the investigator identifies, if any?

 According to this research study the investigator made no mention of its

relevance for nursing practice