An important decision point when planning research is whether to use existing tools,
adapt from those that have already been developed, or create new tools to fit a specific purpose.
Some of the pros and cons of each option are listed below in Table 4.
Table 4. Deciding on Instruments
- Using Existing Instruments
- Pros:
- Can be incorporated into research quickly
- Often prepared by professional expert
- May have norms for comparison purposes
- May have known reliability and validity indicators
- Can build on existing knowledge base using the same instrument
- May be keyed to content or proficiency standards
- Cons:
- May not "fit" research question exactly
- May require training for administration, scoring, or analysis
- may incur cost to purchase, score, or analyze
- May be too long for the purposes at hand, take too much time to complete
- Adapting Existing Tools
(e.g., using portions of an instrument, small wording changes, changing the time frame) - Pros:
- Can be modified to suit research question or service-learning context
- Most of the work of creating the tool has been completed
- May be able to compare results with previous results or norms (but only on relevant items or subscales)
- Using only a portion of an existing instrument may lessen completion time, and thus increase response rate
- Cons:
- Changing a known quantity into something unknown
- Previous reliability and validity indicators may no longer apply
- Developing New Instruments
- Pros:
- Can develop instrument to fit specific need
- Instrument itself may comprise a significant contribution to the field of research
- Cons:
- Requires time, effort, resources, expertise
- Requires knowledge of scale development procedures
- Runs risk that instrument will not be reliable or valid for purpose at hand