Media Literacy Foundations of Research Inquiry in Health

Question: Discuss about foundations of research inquiry in health? Answer: Introduction Media literacy prospectively changes outcomes in a number of disciplines that include public health, communication, and education. Nevertheless, a vital challenge in this area of study lies in the ability to measure media literacy to advance research in this line of study. However, Arke and Primack (2009) explain the progressive advancement in the testing of media literacy through a pilot appraisal. The work of the two authors stems from the ever present need to authenticate, improve, and carefully develop purpose measures for media literacy. The authors give the purpose of their study as the ability to initiate the process of media literacy measure through a pilot program in which the authors assess psychometric properties of media literacy. The two authors initiate the study process by quantifying the research goal on the basis of a conventional theoretical model available in the research area. Discussion Media literacy is literary speaking the individual skill that empowers an individual to create, evaluate, analyze, and understand media communication in its various forms. Silverblatt (2001) argues that critical thinking is a crucial tool in the validation of media literacy since it allows the participants to expand how one judges a media content be it from a print media, television, or radio. Educationalists in the United States, however, are far behind their counterparts in the developed economies such as Great Britain, Australia, New Zealand, and Canada in the media literacy curriculum. The Arke and Primack (2009) study resolutely assessed the internal uniformity of the three major media forms of print media, television, and radio on the overall scale as the main aim of study. In this aim, the duo hypothesized that the measure of media literacy in each case would obey the Cronbach's alpha values. The second aim was to evaluate the validity of each of the media content through the comparison of the principal factor of the measurement figures with the theoretical model. Here, the hypothesis of the duo was that the principal factor would exact the theoretical source of the measurement. Lastly, the aim of the authors was to appraise the validity of the measurement through a comparison of media literacy ideals with the measurement of critical thinking. As cited by Meltzoff, J. (1998), the hypothesis of authors here is that the combined media literacy achievement would considerably correlate with the compound critical thinking achievement measured through the use of a credible thinking proficiency test. However, the duo generalized reliability. The duo argues that the outcome of a participatory media literacy curriculum is not expressly definable or measurable, as there is a general belief of what these outcomes represent (Arke and Primack, 2009). According to Cozby and Bates (2012), construct validity is the degree to which the operations of a variable truly mirrors the factual theoretical meaning of that variable. This is irrespective of whether the variable under consideration truly measures the theoretical variable it meant to measure. Therefore, the authors measures are reliable. Arke and Primack (2009) argue that the 6 indicators that define construct validity are purpose, inference, evaluation, technique, sender, and missing. To assess construct validity, the researchers formed the 6 indicator items on the basis of a compound theoretical model before they administered these on 34 college communications students. The researchers concluded that every one of three media literacy sub-measurements revealed that internal consistency reliability was good as the readings were: 1reading came to 0.74; 2was 0.79, while 3reading was 0.75. The primary mechanisms in the analysis exposed five factors which correspond directly with the fundamental theoretical model. As such, the media literacy level extensively interrelated well to the compound critical thinking scale as rreading was 0.32, while P reading was .03. Conclusion The quantifying media literacy measure proves to be an important scale for quantifying the outcomes in this arena of study, and the evaluation of media literacy interference. This is on the basis of the analysis of the 6 construct validity indicators discussed. References Arke, E. T., Primack, B. A. (2009). Quantifying media literacy: Development, reliability, and validity of a new measure. Educational Media International, 46(1), 53-65. Cozby, P. C., Bates, S. C. (2012).Methods in behavioral research. New York: McGraw-Hill. Meltzoff, J. (1998). Critical thinking about research: Psychology and related fields. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Silverblatt A.(2001).Media literacy: Keys to interpreting media messages.2nd ed. Praeger Publishers; Westport, CT: 2001.