Theory Analysis Essay Example for Free

Theory Analysis EssayThe ultimate goal of guess military rank is to determine the potential of the theory to scientific knowledge. intrepidTheory evaluationo meaningful and logical adequacyoOperational and empirical adequacyoTestabilityoGeneralityoContribution to understandingoPredictabilityoPragmatic adequacyLogical adequacy (diagramming) find outing all theoretical foothold (concepts, constructs, operational definitions, referents).Theory is a set of interrelated concepts and statementsEmprical adequacy- single most important criterion for evaluating a theory applied in practice.Marg aret EllisIdentified characteristics of prodigious theoriesScopeComplexityTestabilityUsefulnessImplicit values of the theoristInformation generationMeaningful terminologyChoose two of the theory evaluation approaches that are discussed in chapter 5 of McEwen. Locate the original sources of these two theorists some articles are in Course Resources for you. Compare and contrast the strategies that they advocate for theory evaluation. What commonalities do you represent? How do the two approaches differ? Could you use a synthesized version of the two approaches? Share your insights with your group under Analytic approaches topic. All postings due by 10/12. I chose to compare and contrast the theory evaluation approaches of Rosemary Ellis and Margaret E. Hardy. Ellis uses various characteristics such as scope, complexity, testability, usefulness, implicit values, information generation and meaningful terminology to identify the significance of nursing theory (Ellis, 1968).Hardy on the other hand, has a different set of criterion for evaluation theory meaningful and logical adequacy, operations and empirical adequacy, testability, generality, contribution to understanding, predictability and pragmatic adequacy (Hardy, 1973). I noniced more similarities than differences in the two theory evaluation approaches. The first similarity I noteworthy was that both theorists refe rred to possibleness as a defining component of the development of a theory. Ellis states that theories are insignificant if they do not generate a hypothesis of some sort (Ellis, 1968). Hardy states that a theory is made up of hypothesis derived from axioms, initial hypothesis or postulates (Hardy, 1973). The second similarity I make between both theorists was the characteristic of usefulness as a prime characteristic for the significance of a theory. Ellis states that theories are not considered significant if their usefulness is not explored to develop and guide practice (Ellis, 1968).Similarly, Hardy has a characteristic of pragmatic adequacy, which is essentially the usefulness of a theory (Hardy, 1973). The third similarity I entrap was the characteristic of information generation used in both theory evaluation approaches. Ellis states that significant theories are capable of generating a great deal of natural information (Ellis, 1968). Hardys characteristic of contributio n to understanding is similar in that it explores new ideas, insight, and different ways of looking at the theory (Hardy, 1973). The suffer similarity I found was the shared characteristic of generality and scope. Ellis states that the broader the scope of the theory, the greater the significance of the theory (Ellis, 1968). Similarly, Hardy believes the more general a theory is the more useful it is (Hardy, 1973).I noticed a few differences between the two theorists. The first difference I noted was their views on the testability of a theory. slice Ellis lists testability as a characteristic, she does not require it to be significant to the evaluation of the theory. She goes so far as to say that testability could be sacrificed for scope, complexity, and clinical usefulness (Ellis, 1968). On the contrary, Hardy lists testability as an important attribute to evaluating a theory, and goes into further detail on how to measure the theory.The most obvious difference between the two a pproaches is the tell characteristics listed to evaluate the theory. Hardy lists logical adequacy, operational/empirical adequacy and predictability, while Ellis lists complexity, and implicit values of the theorist. I do think that there could be a synthesized version of the two approaches since they do share more similarities than differences. I would chose Margaret Hardys approach over Rosemary Elliss, due to the detailed characteristics listed in her evaluation method. I felt her points were more concise, and worked well together as a criterion for evaluating a theory.ReferencesEllis, R. (1968). Characteristics Of Significant Theories. Theory Development in Nursing, 17(3), 217-222. Hardy, M. (1973). Theories Components, Development, Evaluation. Theoretical Foundations for Nursing, 23(2), 100-106.