types of validity in research slideshare

9 Types of Validity in Research

Dave Cornell (PhD)

Dr. Cornell has worked in education for more than 20 years. His work has involved designing teacher certification for Trinity College in London and in-service training for state governments in the United States. He has trained kindergarten teachers in 8 countries and helped businessmen and women open baby centers and kindergartens in 3 countries.

Learn about our Editorial Process

Chris Drew (PhD)

This article was peer-reviewed and edited by Chris Drew (PhD). The review process on Helpful Professor involves having a PhD level expert fact check, edit, and contribute to articles. Reviewers ensure all content reflects expert academic consensus and is backed up with reference to academic studies. Dr. Drew has published over 20 academic articles in scholarly journals. He is the former editor of the Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education and holds a PhD in Education from ACU.

Validity refers to whether or not a test or an experiment is actually doing what it is intended to do.

Validity sits upon a spectrum. For example:

• Low Validity: Most people now know that the standard IQ test does not actually measure intelligence or predict success in life.
• High Validity: By contrast, a standard pregnancy test is about 99% accurate , meaning it has very high validity and is therefore a very reliable test.

There are many ways to determine validity. Most of them are defined below.

Types of Validity

1. face validity.

Face validity refers to whether a scale “appears” to measure what it is supposed to measure. That is, do the questions seem to be logically related to the construct under study.

For example, a personality scale that measures emotional intelligence should have questions about self-awareness and empathy. It should not have questions about math or chemistry.

One common way to assess face validity is to ask a panel of experts to examine the scale and rate it’s appropriateness as a tool for measuring the construct. If the experts agree that the scale measures what it has been designed to measure, then the scale is said to have face validity.

If a scale, or a test, doesn’t have face validity, then people taking it won’t be serious.

Conbach explains it in the following way:

“When a patient loses faith in the medicine his doctor prescribes, it loses much of its power to improve his health. He may skip doses, and in the end may decide doctors cannot help him and let treatment lapse all together. For similar reasons, when selecting a test one must consider how worthwhile it will appear to the participant who takes it and other laymen who will see the results” (Cronbach, 1970, p. 182).

2. Content Validity

Content validity refers to whether a test or scale is measuring all of the components of a given construct. For example, if there are five dimensions of emotional intelligence (EQ), then a scale that measures EQ should contain questions regarding each dimension.

Similar to face validity, content validity can be assessed by asking subject matter experts (SMEs) to examine the test. If experts agree that the test includes items that assess every domain of the construct, then the test has content validity.

For example, the math portion of the SAT contains questions that require skills in many types of math: arithmetic, algebra, geometry, calculus, and many others. Since there are questions that assess each type of math, then the test has content validity.

The developer of the test could ask SMEs to rate the test’s construct validity. If the SMEs all give the test high ratings, then it has construct validity.

3. Construct Validity

Construct validity is the extent to which a measurement tool is truly assessing what it has been designed to assess.

There are two main methods of assessing construct validity: convergent and discriminant validity.

Convergent validity involves taking two tests that are supposed to measure the same construct and administering them to a sample of participants. The higher the correlation between the two tests, the stronger the construct validity.

With divergent validity, two tests that measure completely different constructs are administered to the same sample of participants. Since the tests are measuring different constructs, there should be a very low correlation between the two.

4. Internal Validity

Internal validity refers to whether or not the results of an experiment are due to the manipulation of the independent, or treatment, variables. For example, a researcher wants to examine how temperature affects willingness to help, so they have research participants wait in a room.

There are different rooms, one has the temperature set at normal, one at moderately warm, and the other at very warm.

During the next phase of the study, participants are asked to donate to a local charity before taking part in the rest of the study. The results showed that as the temperature of the room increased, donations decreased.

On the surface, it seems as though the study has internal validity: room temperature affected donations. However, even though the experiment involved three different rooms set at different temperatures, each room was a different size. The smallest room was the warmest and the normal temperature room was the largest.

Now, we don’t know if the donations were affected by room temperature or room size. So, the study has questionable internal validity.

Another way internal validity is assessed is through inter-rater reliability measures, which helps bolster both the validity and reliability of the study.

5. External Validity

External validity refers to whether the results of a study generalize to the real world or other situations. A lot of psychological studies take place in a university lab. Therefore, the setting is not very realistic.

This creates a big problem regarding external validity. Can we say that what happens in a lab would be the same thing that would happen in the real world?

For example, a study on mindfulness involves the researcher randomly assigning different research participants to use one of three mindfulness apps on their phones at home every night for 3 weeks. At the end of three weeks, their level of stress is measured with some high-tech EEG equipment.

This study has external validity because the participants used real apps and they were at home when using those apps. The apps and the home setting are realistic, so the study has external validity. 

See More: Examples of External Validity

6. Concurrent Validity

Concurrent validity is a method of assessing validity that involves comparing a new test with an already existing test, or an already established criterion.

For example, a newly developed math test for the SAT will need to be validated before giving it to thousands of students. So, the new version of the test is administered to a sample of college math majors along with the old version of the test.

Scores on the two tests are compared by calculating a correlation between the two. The higher the correlation, the stronger the concurrent validity of the new test.

7. Predictive Validity

Predictive validity refers to whether scores on one test are associated with performance on a given criterion. That is, can a person’s score on the test predict their performance on the criterion?

For example, an IT company needs to hire dozens of programmers for an upcoming project. But conducting interviews with hundreds of applicants is time-consuming and not very accurate at identifying skilled coders.

So, the company develops a test that contains programming problems similar to the demands of the new project. The company assesses predictive validity of the test by having their current programmers take the test and then compare their scores with their yearly performance evaluations.

The results indicate that programmers with high marks in their evaluations also did very well on the test. Therefore, the test has predictive validity.  

Now, when new applicants’ take the test, the company can predict how well they will do at the job in the future. People that do well on the predictor variable test will most likely do well at the job.

8. Statistical Conclusion Validity

Statistical conclusion validity refers to whether the conclusions drawn by the authors of a study are supported by the statistical procedures.

For example, did the study apply the correct statistical analyses, were adequate sampling procedures implemented, did the study use measurement tools that are valid and reliable?

If the answers to those questions are all “yes,” then the study has statistical conclusion validity. However, if the some or all of the answers are “no,” then the conclusions of the study are called into question.

Using the wrong statistical analyses or basing the conclusions on very small sample sizes, make the results questionable. If the results are based on faulty procedures, then the conclusions cannot be accepted as valid.

9. Criterion Validity

Criterion validity is sometimes called predictive validity. It refers to how well scores on one measurement device are associated with scores on a given performance domain (the criterion).

For example, how well do SAT scores predict college GPA? Or, to what extent are measures of consumer confidence related to the economy?

An example of low criterion validity is how poorly athletic performance at the NFL’s combine actually predicts performance on the field on gameday. There are dozens of tests that the athletes go through, but about 99% of them have no association with how well they do in games.  

However, nutrition and exercise are highly related to longevity (the criterion). Those constructs have criterion validity because hundreds of studies have identified that nutrition and exercise are directly linked to living a longer and healthier life.

There are so many types of validity because the measurement precision of abstract concepts is hard to discern. There can also be confusion and disagreement among experts on the definition of constructs and how they should be measured.

For these reasons, social scientists have spent considerable time developing a variety of methods to assess the validity of their measurement tools. Sometimes this reveals ways to improve techniques, and sometimes it reveals the fallacy of trying to predict the future based on faulty assessment procedures.  

Cook, T.D. and Campbell, D.T. (1979) Quasi-Experimentation: Design and Analysis Issues for Field Settings. Houghton Mifflin, Boston.

Cohen, R. J., & Swerdlik, M. E. (2005). Psychological testing and assessment: An introduction to tests and measurement (6th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Cronbach, L. J. (1970). Essentials of Psychological Testing . New York: Harper & Row.

Cronbach, L. J., and Meehl, P. E. (1955) Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin , 52 , 281-302.

Simms, L. (2007). Classical and Modern Methods of Psychological Scale Construction. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2 (1), 414 – 433. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2007.00044.x

• Dave Cornell (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/dave-cornell-phd/ 23 Achieved Status Examples
• Dave Cornell (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/dave-cornell-phd/ 25 Defense Mechanisms Examples
• Dave Cornell (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/dave-cornell-phd/ 15 Theory of Planned Behavior Examples
• Dave Cornell (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/dave-cornell-phd/ 18 Adaptive Behavior Examples

• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 23 Achieved Status Examples
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 15 Ableism Examples
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 25 Defense Mechanisms Examples
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 15 Theory of Planned Behavior Examples

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

• My presentations

Auth with social network:

Download presentation

We think you have liked this presentation. If you wish to download it, please recommend it to your friends in any social system. Share buttons are a little bit lower. Thank you!

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Chapter 8 VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY

Published by Jane Oliver Modified over 5 years ago

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Chapter 8 VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY"— Presentation transcript:

Questionnaire Development

Measurement Concepts Operational Definition: is the definition of a variable in terms of the actual procedures used by the researcher to measure and/or.

Topics: Quality of Measurements

Survey Methodology Reliability and Validity EPID 626 Lecture 12.

1 COMM 301: Empirical Research in Communication Kwan M Lee Lect4_1.

© 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill Validity and Reliability Chapter Eight.

VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY

Lesson Six Reliability.

Research Methodology Lecture No : 11 (Goodness Of Measures)

Reliability.

What is a Good Test Validity: Does test measure what it is supposed to measure? Reliability: Are the results consistent? Objectivity: Can two or more.

MGT-491 QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS AND RESEARCH FOR MANAGEMENT

Assessment Procedures for Counselors and Helping Professionals, 7e © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Chapter 6 Validity.

Reliability and Validity of Research Instruments

Prepared by : The instructor :

Research Methods in MIS

Chapter 9 Flashcards. measurement method that uses uniform procedures to collect, score, interpret, and report numerical results; usually has norms and.

Validity and Reliability EAF 410 July 9, Validity b Degree to which evidence supports inferences made b Appropriate b Meaningful b Useful.

Classroom Assessment A Practical Guide for Educators by Craig A

About project

© 2024 SlidePlayer.com Inc. All rights reserved.

Understanding Validity and Reliability in Research

Oct 17, 2023

100 likes | 142 Views

This article explains the types of validity and reliability in research, including internal and external validity, as well as internal and external reliability. It provides examples and highlights the importance of replicating studies for external reliability.

Share Presentation

• reliability
• internal validity
• external validity
• internal reliability
• external reliability
• replication

Presentation Transcript

Validity • For research to be considered valid, it must be based on fact or evidence; that is, it must be "capable of being justified."

Types of Validity External validity is the extent to which results can be generalized to populations, situations, and conditions. Internal validity is the extent to which results can be interpreted accurately.

Internal Validity Requires: • random assignment of subjects to the test conditions. • the use of the same measurement instrument and procedures for all subjects.

Eample #1: Internal Validity School 1 Teacher A Blue Program Class 1 8th Grade Boys Random Assignment Physical Performance Test B Administered by Teacher A 16 Weeks of Program Implementation Testing Period School 2 Teacher A Red Program Class 1 8th Grade Boys Random Assignment Physical Performance Test B Administered by Teacher A

External Validity Requires: • Random selection of subjects (or random assignment to study conditions). • The use of a single measurement instrument and procedure.

Example #2: External Validity Elementary School #1 15 Randomly Selected Teachers Survey Conducted Elementary School #2 15 Randomly Selected Teachers Results: All Teachers Schools 1-5 Elementary School #3 15 Randomly Selected Teachers Elementary School #4 15 Randomly Selected Teachers

Reliability • Research is reliable to the extent that • (1) its components are consistent with one another (internal reliability) • (2) it can be replicated and yield similar outcomes (external reliability).

Internal Reliability • Good internal reliabilityis demonstrated by a consistent: • data collection procedure, • data analysis process, and • interpretation of the data.

Example #3: Internal Reliability Interviewer A Telephone Survey #1 28 randomly selected high school principals Interviewer B Telephone Survey #1 28 randomly selected high school principals Interviewer C Telephone Survey #1 28 randomly selected high school principals Interviewer D Telephone Survey #1 28 randomly selected high school principals

External Reliability • Good external reliabilityexists when a study is described in enough detail to facilitate its replication. • A research report, if a study is to be considered externally reliable, includes: • detailed description of the study's design • detailed description of the population, sample & sampling strategy • explanation of the data collection strategy(ies) & procedure(s) • detailed explanation of analysis procedures. • Bottom Line: Can the study be replicated?

• More by User

Validity Definitions Extent to which a test measures what it purports to measure Extent to which a test is used in an impartial, just, and equitable way Validity is what the test measures and how well it does so (Anastasi, 1954)

3.03k views • 20 slides

Today's Objectives. What is validity and what are the 4 broad categories of methods for establishing validity evidence?Why is the base rate of the predictor and of the criterion important considerations in establishing criterion validity?Define construct and name the methods for establishing const

537 views • 21 slides

Definitions. Validity is the extent to which the inferences made from test scores are accurateVariation in the underlying construct causes variation in the measurement processEstablishing causality in measurement is no different than establishing causality for any research questionMust show ev

1.46k views • 79 slides

Introduction to Validity. Validity: the best available approximation to the truth of a given proposition, inference, or conclusion.Only propositions can be said to be valid.It is a proposition, inference or conclusion that can have validity.. . Cause-effect construct. Program-outcomes relationship

600 views • 26 slides

Validity. “The extent to which a test or research study measures what it was designed to measure”. www.psychlotron.org.uk. Validity. Internal validity The extent to which the research study was properly conducted, so that it produced a truthful result

355 views • 9 slides

Validity. Face Validity. The extent to which items on a test appear to be meaningful and relevant to the construct being measured. Content-Related Evidence for Validity. The evidence that the content of a test represents the conceptual domain that the test is designed to cover

487 views • 12 slides

Validity. Test Validity & Experiment Validity.

Validity. Test Validity & Experiment Validity. I N A O E. Niusvel Acosta Mendoza. Criterion Validity. I N A O E. Criterion validity. Split into concurrent validity (other criteria assessed simultaneously) and predictive validity (predicting future or past events) sub-areas.

736 views • 23 slides

Validity. Is the Test Appropriate, Useful, and Meaningful?. Properties of Validity. Does the test measure what it purports to measure? Validity is a property of inferences that can be made. Validity should be established over multiple inferences. Evidence of Validity. Meaning of test scores

476 views • 21 slides

275 views • 8 slides

Validity. Validity. Degree to which inferences made using data are justified or supported by evidence Some types of validity Criterion-related Content Construct All part of unitarian view of validity

661 views • 27 slides

Content Validity Face Validity

Content Validity Face Validity. Examples of double barrel items.

396 views • 3 slides

Validity. Review. Definition. Does it (method/measure) measure what it is intended to measure? Internal Validity (was there a genuine effect?) External Validity (can we generalise the findings?). Poor Validity Milgram (?) Zimbardo Tajfel Loftus Gould Gardner & Gardner. Good Validity

328 views • 7 slides

Validity. Today’s class. Check-in Quiz Validity lecture. Check in. Quiz—only a quiz, worth 3% of grade Article assignment two is posted You can choose an article or use the one I suggest Exam review guide is posted You can work in groups if you want

309 views • 12 slides

Validity. Determining Validity. There are several ways to measure validity. The most commonly addressed include: - Face Validity

854 views • 39 slides

Validity. Validity. All UH students are communists. All communists like broccoli. All UH students like broccoli. Validity. All UH students are communists. All communists like broccoli. GOOD All UH students like broccoli. Validity. All UH students are communists.

314 views • 21 slides

Validity. RMS – May 28, 2014. Measurement Reliability. The extent to which a measurement gives results that are consistent. Measurement Validity. The degree to which an assessment measures what it is supposed to measure. Construct validity.

925 views • 30 slides

Validity. EDUC 5535 Spring 2013. Standardized Tests: A Review. An artifact of the eugenics movement (in the 1920’s) - an attempt to sort people by their perceived intelligence or ability. Short buzz : How are tests used to sort?. Examples. Sorting Purpose Who goes to what college

301 views • 20 slides

Validity. Introduction to Communication Research School of Communication Studies James Madison University Dr. Michael Smilowitz. Reliability and Validity. Remember the distinction: Reliability assesses the internal property of the consistency of the measurement.

398 views • 20 slides

Validity. Does the test cover what we are told (or believe) it covers? To what extent? Is the assessment being used for an appropriate purpose?. Validity Topics:. Definition (usual and refined) Categories of validity evidence A. face validity

471 views • 18 slides

240 views • 21 slides

Validity. True experiments. some type of intervention or treatment implemented high degree of control over – experimental conditions; systematic manipulation of IV; choice of DV and assignment of participants

247 views • 21 slides

Validity. For research to be considered valid, it must be based on fact or evidence; that is, it must be "capable of being justified.". Types of Validity. External validity is the extent to which results can be generalized to populations, situations, and conditions. Internal validity

330 views • 10 slides