500 words. APA 7th style (strictly). 5 references less than 5 years. Book of ref

500 words. APA 7th style (strictly). 5 references less than 5 years. Book of reference: Middle range Theories. Application to Nursing research. Peterson / S Bredow, T (part III. Middle range Theories: Psichological. 5 Self-efficacy by Barbara Resnick)
Objective:
Using the criteria presented in week 2, critique the theory of Self-Efficacy using the internal and external criticism evaluation process.
My work for week 2:
Internal and External Criticism Used to Evaluate Middle Range Theories
Under the auspices of social research, judging the adaptability of theory in research works ensures the right ideas are applied in research work resulting in reliable and valuable data collection and interpretations. Social science implementation over the years has progressed towards progressive use of theories to offer insightful understanding and, more importantly, explanation of the success of ideas in research (Khoshsima at el.,2018). Substantial evidence illustrates that the use of approaches aid in designing a research question, guiding in selecting relevant research data, and proposing the influences of phenomena being investigated. This paper explores the internal and external criticism used in research to evaluate middle-range theories.
Internal Criticism
The researcher makes an effort to reestablish the text’s original meaning through the process known as internal critique, also known as positive criticism. In this stage of hermeneutics, the researcher deals with the text’s purpose rather than the document’s external components. This is the phase of hermeneutics known as “interpretation.” Knowledge of the context-specific to the domain is more important than ever before.
Positive criticism will attempt to reconstruct the original meaning of the statements. In contrast, negative criticism will cast doubt on the findings that positive and external criticism has established as reasonable (Elad‐Strenger at el.,2019). With internal criticism, there are certain things to be checked, like an eyewitness or a secondhand account available when the theory was being put in place. It also explains why this theory was written with its literal meaning. What was the idea talking about in the first place, and why was the purpose of writing this theory? This must come with the internal consistency of the approach. Barnum establishes the criteria to evaluate a theory from the point of view of the internal criticism: “clarity, consistency, adequacy, logical development, and level of development of the theory” (Khoshnood, 2020, p 4).
External Criticism
Historians utilize external critique to determine whether or not someone’s source is reliable. This method refers to determining whether or not someone’s source is dependable by checking the source’s reliability. After first being examined from the outside, an authorized source is then reviewed to decide what can or cannot be accepted. When historians investigate the credibility of a basis to establish whether or not the source is authentic, they are engaging in the activity of external critique. Before we can conduct an accurate analysis of the data, we need to ascertain not just whether we can depend on the knowledge and use it as a reference point first. This is an essential step in the process.
When an individual criticizes the practicability of a researcher’s theory from the outside, this is an example of external criticism of research theories. It is also considered criticism whenever the individual in question cannot comprehend the study method. Because it does not assume any possible answers or viewpoints that can emerge from other experts on the subject, criticism that comes from the outside is not as constructive as criticism from within an organization (Remolina-Caviedes 2019). Barnum, for the evaluation from the point of view of the external criticism, considers the following points: “convergence of reality, utility, significance, discrimination, scope of the theory, and complexity” (Khoshnood, 2020, p 6).
Conclusion
Students frequently struggle to understand a theory presented to them because they are not provided with sufficient background information on the subject. Internal and external criticism are valuable tools used to evaluate middle range theories. As if it were the machine’s components, the internal criticism studies how these parts mesh with each other to produce a job, that is, the internal environment. At the same time, the external criticism considers how the theory fits between the elements of the metaparadigm in nursing, that is, the external environment (Peterson, 2019), meaning a result, and practical application of the result.
References
Elad‐Strenger, J., Halperin, E., & Saguy, T. (2019). Facilitating hope among the hopeless: the role of ideology and moral content in shaping reactions to internal criticism in the context of intractable conflict. Social Science Quarterly, 100(6), 2425-2444.
Khoshnood, Z., Rayyani, M., & Tirgari, B. (2020). Theory analysis for Pender’s health promotion model (HPM) by Barnum’s criteria: a critical perspective. International Journal of Adolescent Medicine and Health, 32(4) https://doi.org/10.1515/ijamh-2017-0160
Khoshsima, H., Farokhipour, S., & Jalalvand, M. (2018). A Criticism of the Theory of Language Emergentism. Religious Anthropology, 15(39), 125-143.
Peterson, S., Bredow, T. S. (2019). Middle Range Theories: Application to Nursing Research and Practice. (n.p.): Wolters Kluwer Health.
Remolina-Caviedes, J. F. (2019). Criticism of the External Evaluation Policies of Colombia and Brazil. Folios, (50), 173-188.
Follow Discussion Rubric attached specially :
Inclusion of the student outcomes explored in the discussion as well as the role-specific competencies as applicable. (10%)
0
The student does not explain how the Student Learning Outcomes were explored or related to the weekly discussion topic.
6
The student does not explain how the Student Learning Outcomes were explored or related to the weekly discussion topic. The student only provides a list of the applicable Student Learning Outcome.
8
The student does not explain how the Student Learning Outcomes were explored or related to the weekly discussion topic.
10
The student provides an explanation of how the applicable Student Learning Outcomes were explored or related to the weekly discussion topic.