imagine that you were asked to give a scale construction proposal to a group of hypothetical PhD students. The PowerPoint presentation should include the definition of the construct that you intend to make a scale on, the existing tools measuring it, and other related studies. Also include your justification and rationale for your construction. More importantly, discuss how you will construct the items and the item response scales, how you will analyze the items’ reliabilities, and establish the scale’s validity.
Incorporate appropriate animations, transitions, and graphics as well as speaker notes for each slide. The speaker notes may be comprised of brief paragraphs or bulleted lists.
Support your presentation with at least five scholarly resources. In addition to these specified resources, other appropriate scholarly resources may be included
After defining the construct, I would discuss existing tools for measuring it such as Rosenberg’s Self-Esteem Scale or Coopersmith’s Self-Esteem Inventory (Hirsch et al., 2008). These existing tools provide insight into what types of items should be included in my own proposed scale and how they should be worded. Additionally, related studies can provide useful information about correlations between different constructs and how this might affect which items are chosen for the new scale.
Next, I would discuss my justification and rationale for constructing an entirely new instrument rather than using an existing one. It may be necessary if there are no instruments available that accurately reflect the desired construct or if there is evidence to suggest that an improved version exists (Yamaguchi & Yamaguchi, 2010). Once these considerations have been addressed, I would move onto discussing how to actually construct the items and scales associated with them. This includes deciding on item response formats such as Likert scales or multiple choice questions and thinking about what type of content will best capture responses accurately (Guttman & Schmittelmeier, 2019).
Finally, criteria must be established in order to evaluate whether or not the resulting tool achieves its purpose well enough to warrant use in research studies. To do so analysis techniques such as Cronbach’s alpha coefficients can measure internal consistency reliability while correlation with existing tools can establish concurrent validity (Guttman & Schmittelmeier, 2019). In conclusion, creating a valid instrument involves a great deal of research but with careful planning we can ensure that our efforts result in something meaningful that can be used effectively in future studies.
legal or not to continue these activities, as he continually tracked down a center ground, where it tends to be legitimate to do things like this however never consistently (Begby et al (2006b), Page 326-31). This is upheld by Frowe, who estimates the real strategies as per proportionality and military need. It relies upon the size of how much harm done to each other, to pass judgment on the activities after a conflict. For instance, one can’t just nuke the fear monger bunches all through the center east, since it isn’t just relative, it will harm the entire populace, a potentially negative result. All the more critically, the troopers should have the right aim in the thing they will accomplish, forfeiting the expenses for their activities. For instance: to execute all detainees of war, they should do it for the right goal and for a noble motivation, corresponding to the damage done to them. This is upheld by Vittola: ‘not generally legitimate to execute all warriors… we should consider… size of the injury incurred by the foe.’ This is additionally upheld by Frowe approach, which is much more upright than Vittola’s view however suggests similar plans: ‘can’t be rebuffed just for battling.’ This implies one can’t just rebuff another in light of the fact that they have been a soldier. They should be treated as compassionately as could really be expected. Be that as it may, the circumstance is heightened on the off chance that killing them can prompt harmony and security, inside the interests, all things considered. By and large, jus in bello recommends in wars, mischief must be utilized against soldiers, never against the guiltless. Yet, eventually, the point is to lay out harmony and security inside the region. As Vittola’s decision: ‘the quest for equity for which he battles and the guard of his country’ is the thing countries ought to be battling for in wars (Begby et al (2006b), Page 332). Accordingly, albeit the present world has created, we can see not vastly different from the pioneer accounts on fighting and the traditionists, giving one more segment of the hypothesis of the simply war. By and by, we can in any case reason that there can’t be one authoritative hypothesis of the simply war hypothesis in view of its normativity.
Jus post bellum
At last, jus post bellum recommends that the moves we ought to make after a conflict (Frowe (2010), Page 208). First and foremost, Vittola contends after a conflict, it is the obligation of the pioneer to judge how to manage the foe (Begby et al (2006b), Page 332).. Once more, proportionality is underlined. For instance, the Versailles settlement forced after WWI is tentatively excessively cruel, as it was not all Germany’s problem for the conflict. This is upheld by Frowe, who communicates two perspectives in jus post bellum: Moderation and Maximalism, which are very varying perspectives. Minimalists recommend a more tolerant methodology while maximalist, supporting the above model, gives a crueler methodology, rebuffing the foe both monetarily and strategically (Frowe (2010), Page 208). At the last example, be that as it may, the point of war is to lay out harmony security, so whatever should be done can be ethically legitimate, assuming it observes the guidelines of jus promotion bellum. All in all, simply war hypothesis is entirely contestable and can contend in various ways. Notwithstanding, the foundation of an equitable harmony is essential, making all war type circumstance to have various methods of a