Quantitative Determination of the Relationship between Internal Validity and Bias in Software Engineering Experiments: Consequences for Systematic Literature Reviews

Quality assessment is one of the activities performed as part of systematic literature reviews. It is commonly accepted that a good quality experiment is bias free. Bias is considered to be related to internal validity (e.g., how adequately the experiment is planned, executed and analysed). Quality assessment is usually conducted using checklists and quality scales. It has not yet been proven;however, that quality is related to experimental bias. Aim: Identify whether there is a relationship between internal validity and bias in software engineering experiments. Method: We built a quality scale to determine the quality of the studies, which we applied to 28 experiments included in two systematic literature reviews. We proposed an objective indicator of experimental bias, which we applied to the same 28 experiments. Finally, we analysed the correlations between the quality scores and the proposed measure of bias. Results: We failed to find a relationship between the global quality score (resulting from the quality scale) and bias; however, we did identify interesting correlations between bias and some particular aspects of internal validity measured by the instrument. Conclusions: There is an empirically provable relationship between internal validity and bias. It is feasible to apply quality assessment in systematic literature reviews, subject to limits on the internal validity aspects for consideration.

E-MIS validity applied to TELMA enhanced learning environment

Enhanced learning environments are arising with great success within the field of cognitive skills training in minimally invasive surgery (MIS) because they provides multiple benefits since they avoid time, spatial and cost constraints. TELMA [1,2] is a new technology enhanced learning platform that promotes collaborative and ubiquitous training of surgeons. This platform is based on four main modules: an authoring tool, a learning content and knowledge management system, an evaluation module and a professional network. TELMA has been designed and developed focused on the user; therefore it is necessary to carry out a user validation as final stage of the development. For this purpose, e-MIS validity [3] has been defined. This validation includes usability, contents and functionality validities both for the development and production stages of any e-Learning web platform. Using e-MIS validity, the e-Learning is fully validated since it includes subjective and objective metrics. The purpose of this study is to specify and apply a set of objective and subjective metrics using e-MIS validity to test usability, contents and functionality of TELMA environment within the development stage.

Validity and reliability of AMPET Greek versión: a first examination of learning motivation in Greek PE settings

Validity and reliability of AMPET Greek versión: a first examination of learning motivation in Greek PE settings

Face, content, and construct validity of the EndoViS training system for objective assessment of psychomotor skills of laparoscopic surgeons

Background The aim of this study is to present face, content, and constructs validity of the endoscopic orthogonal video system (EndoViS) training system and determines its efficiency as a training and objective assessment tool of the surgeons’ psychomotor skills. Methods Thirty-five surgeons and medical students participated in this study: 11 medical students, 19 residents, and 5 experts. All participants performed four basic skill tasks using conventional laparoscopic instruments and EndoViS training system. Subsequently, participants filled out a questionnaire regarding the design, realism, overall functionality, and its capabilities to train hand–eye coordination and depth perception, rated on a 5-point Likert scale. Motion data of the instruments were obtained by means of two webcams built into a laparoscopic physical trainer. To identify the surgical instruments in the images, colored markers were placed in each instrument. Thirteen motion-related metrics were used to assess laparoscopic performance of the participants. Statistical analysis of performance was made between novice, intermediate, and expert groups. Internal consistency of all metrics was analyzed with Cronbach’s α test. Results Overall scores about features of the EndoViS system were positives. Participants agreed with the usefulness of tasks and the training capacities of EndoViS system (score >4). Results presented significant differences in the execution of three skill tasks performed by participants. Seven metrics showed construct validity for assessment of performance with high consistency levels. Conclusions EndoViS training system has been successfully validated. Results showed that EndoViS was able to differentiate between participants of varying laparoscopic experience. This simulator is a useful and effective tool to objectively assess laparoscopic psychomotor skills of the surgeons.