1 Answer

Construction, Corroboration and Compare

1249 Views

Votes

1 Answer

The following questions will guide you through one way to examine the Construction, Corroboration, and Compare steps of a source of evidence.

The goal of the Construction step is to closely examine the author’s word choice, as well as what information they present to help draw conclusions about the credibility of the evidence.

The goal of the Corroboration step is to locate other credible sources that are making the same or similar claims.

Finally, the goal of the Compare step is to find credible sources presenting an opposing view on the topic to help you construct a complete picture of what is going on with respect to the topic.

For the following questions, use the quote below as you respond to the questions.

“According to Izumi (2012), "... providing quality service and striving for excellence are ethical responsibilities" (para 1). For many of us, though, Izumi suggested involvement in quality initiatives has become more an administrative mandate than an ethical responsibility for nursing professionals. Because many of the current quality measures are required by external agencies, we may have lost sight of our central role in quality improvement. Survey subscales (bodily pain, physical functioning, general health, general mental health, role limitations due to physical health problems, role limitations due to personal or emotional problems, social functioning, energy/fatigue or vitality) helped us understand the impact of this surgery on patients' quality of life (Laucis, Hays, & Bhattacharyya, 2015).” (Roberts, 2018, p. 142)

Reference Roberts, D. (2018). Nursing ownership of quality improvement. Medsurg Nursing, 27(3), 142.

Qna. Is the tone of the article objective, or biased? What words helped you draw that conclusion?

Qnb. Does the author make it easy to distinguish between the facts and opinions? Or is it simply all speculation?

Qnc. Where might you look for credible corroborating sources? Where might you look for credible sources presenting an alternate viewpoint or claim?

i sixsigma

i sixsigma Added an answer on Nov 24,2021

a. The tone is generally objective, in that is effectively using apparently credible sources of evidence as support and avoids making any sweeping declarative assertions. There is, however, an aspect of personal subjectivity that can be seen in the use of words such as “us” and “we.” The use of in-text APA citation lends itself to a more credible tone, as well.

c. Examples of potential sources of credible corroborating evidence are: Journal: Patient Safety & Quality Improvement Journal, Article: Quality improvement in nursing: Administrative mandate or professional responsibility? (this actually presents evidence corroborating and comparing), professional website: Institute for Healthcare Improvement (this actually presents evidence corroborating and comparing). Examples of Alternate Viewpoints: Article: Quality improvement in nursing: Administrative mandate or professional responsibility? (this actually presents evidence corroborating and comparing), professional website: Institute for Healthcare Improvement (this actually presents evidence corroborating and comparing)

b. The author does make it easy to distinguish facts (the APA cited source all seem factual in nature) from more opinion leaning statements (“For many of us, though, Izumi suggested involvement in quality initiatives has become more an administrative mandate than an ethical responsibility for nursing professionals.”). The opinion leaning statements do appear to have some grounding in evidence and professional experience. So, they do not appear to be simply be speculation. However, from the quote itself, it is not 100% clear which is the case. One would likely want to locate and read the entire article before making a final determination.

Construction, Corroboration and Compare

A PHP Error was encountered