Absolute error revisited: an accuracy indicator in disguise

When target accuracy is defined as the probability that an individual will respond to an accuracy task within a fixed distance around the target, then the composite error measures, E and AE, are shown to be fairly strong indicators of target accuracy in a relative sense. When AE and E are compared, AE is shown to be an even stronger accuracy indicator than E for most reasonable accuracy requirements. This, plus the fact that AE has certain desirable properties in ANOVA procedures, suggests that AE is a good, composite measure of target accuracy and should be analyzed first to determine if target accuracy differences exist. Subsequent analyses of bias and/or variability are then recommended.

Revising the blueprint for the AOCN Examination using a role delineation study for advanced practice oncology nursing

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES

To conduct a role delineation study of advanced oncology nursing practice as a basis for the blueprint for the Advanced Oncology Certified Nurse (AOCN) Examination.

DESIGN

Descriptive and comparative.

SAMPLE

A group of 802 Oncology Nursing Society members comprised of 258 oncology nurse practitioners (NPs), 235 oncology clinical nurse specialists (CNSs), and 309 baccalaureate-prepared oncology nurses.

METHODS

A pilot survey was mailed to a small group to allow refinement of the survey instrument. The survey then was mailed to a total sample of 2,400.

MAIN RESEARCH VARIABLES

Frequency and importance to practice of 121 survey items as well as whether each item reflected an entry-level skill. Survey items were divided into five major domains: (a) Direct Caregiver, (b) Consultant, (c) Administrator/Coordinator, (d) Researcher and (e) Educator.

FINDINGS

Direct Caregiver domain was weighted most heavily (63%), followed by Educator (18%), Consultant (10%), Administrator/Coordinator (5%), and Researcher (4%). Most of the items were identified as entry-level skills, and fewer than 10% of the items differentiated between CNS and NP respondents.

CONCLUSION

The blueprint for the AOCN Examination reflects entry-level advanced practice oncology nursing and is appropriate for both CNSs and NPs in oncology.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE

Examinees, consumers, and employers can have confidence that the AOCN Examination will be based on a blueprint that was revised to reflect current oncology nursing practice and, therefore, is valid for its purpose.

The task difficulty of free throw shooting for males and females

The study demonstrated how the binomial trials model could be used to enhance performance evaluation of a psychomotor task. The study was designed to accomplish three purposes: (a) calibrate the task difficulty of shooting free throws; (b) determine if free-throw shooting is a more difficult task for females than males; and (c) demonstrate how grading scales could be developed when a difference in task difficulty exists. Adults (202 males and 196 females) ranging in age from 18 to 55 years shot 17 consecutive free throws. The performance scores were analyzed using the binomial trials model. The model fit the data for the total group and the females. Because no males scored 0 or more than 13, the model did not fit the data at the extremes of the score continuum. The task difficulty for females was 0.793 (SE = 0.084) and 0.068 (SE = 0.081) for males, which indicated differential item functioning, Chi 1(2) = 38.73, p < .0001. Shooting free throws with a men's regulation basketball was a more difficult task for females than males, which indicates the task does not measure the same latent trait ability for both groups. On average the males' probability of making a free throw was .146 units higher than for the females. Ability estimates were mapped to observed scores for males and females separately and used to illustrate how fair grading scales could be developed.

Methodological Issues in Short-Term Motor Memory Research

Four methodological issues identified and studied by short-term motor memory researchers were examined in this paper: (a) the distributions of three commonly used measures of error (AE, CE, and VE); (b) statistical analysis of these scores as dependent measures in an experiment; (c) within-cell and experiment-wise estimates of the reliability of CE; and (d) the power of the statistical test with CE as the dependent measure. The first two sub-problems were explored theoretically, while the latter two were subjected to empirical examination using four data sets from previously published experiments. The distributions of AE and VE scores were described as non-normal under certain conditions, while the CE score distribution was shown to be normal. Therefore analyses of these three dependent measures may require different statistical procedures. In light of this information, the assumptions affecting estimates of reliability and power in an experimental framework were examined. Based on an analysis of the four data sets, a strategy was proposed in which a relatively small number of subjects could be utilized in an experiment without sacrificing desired experimental controls.