<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Createquity.Createquity.</title>
	<atom:link href="https://createquity.com/tag/research-quality/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://createquity.com</link>
	<description>The most important issues in the arts...and what we can do about them.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Jul 2020 20:17:39 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Guide to Evaluating Research</title>
		<link>https://createquity.com/2017/02/guide-to-evaluating-research/</link>
		<comments>https://createquity.com/2017/02/guide-to-evaluating-research/#respond</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Feb 2017 20:51:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Fari Nzinga]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Insider]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[core research process]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[evaluation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[research quality]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://createquity.com/?p=9621</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[How do you evaluate your sources? Here's how we do it. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div id="attachment_9622" style="width: 570px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><a href="https://flic.kr/p/7mXvdH"><img fetchpriority="high" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-9622" class="wp-image-9622" src="https://createquity.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/4175299981_7752cbe323_o.jpg" alt="4175299981_7752cbe323_o" width="560" height="346" srcset="https://createquity.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/4175299981_7752cbe323_o.jpg 1957w, https://createquity.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/4175299981_7752cbe323_o-300x185.jpg 300w, https://createquity.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/4175299981_7752cbe323_o-768x475.jpg 768w, https://createquity.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/4175299981_7752cbe323_o-1024x633.jpg 1024w" sizes="(max-width: 560px) 100vw, 560px" /></a><p id="caption-attachment-9622" class="wp-caption-text">&#8220;evaluation scale&#8221; by flickr user billsoPHOTO</p></div>
<p>Many people have asked about the process we use to identify and evaluate research worthy of our literature reviews and feature articles. While we don&#8217;t use a rigid scoring system to make those selections, we do provide our research team with a &#8220;guide to evaluating research&#8221; to lend some structure to the process. The evaluation guide draws on four primary criteria: the relevance of the research, the transparency of the process, rigor of design, and the soundness of the interpretation. The <a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1izq1Ul_cAobVpDLVUwSjc2V1k/view">full guide</a> provides detailed challenge questions relating to each of these criteria and some general considerations to keep in mind when reviewing research. As always, we welcome feedback on any of our research materials.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://createquity.com/2017/02/guide-to-evaluating-research/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
