Select personalised content. Create a personalised content profile. Measure ad performance. Select basic ads. Create a personalised ads profile. Select personalised ads. Apply market research to generate audience insights. Measure content performance. Develop and improve products. List of Partners vendors. Validity is the extent to which a test measures what it claims to measure. It is vital for a test to be valid in order for the results to be accurately applied and interpreted.
Psychological assessment is an important part of both experimental research and clinical treatment. One of the greatest concerns when creating a psychological test is whether or not it actually measures what we think it is measuring. For example, a test might be designed to measure a stable personality trait but instead, it measures transitory emotions generated by situational or environmental conditions.
A valid test ensures that the results are an accurate reflection of the dimension undergoing assessment. There are four types of validity. When a test has content validity, the items on the test represent the entire range of possible items the test should cover. Individual test questions may be drawn from a large pool of items that cover a broad range of topics. Because each judge bases their rating on opinion, two independent judges rate the test separately.
Items that are rated as strongly relevant by both judges will be included in the final test. Internal and external validity are used to determine whether or not the results of an experiment are meaningful. Internal validity relates to the way a test is performed, while external validity examines how well the findings may apply in other settings. A test is said to have criterion-related validity when it has demonstrated its effectiveness in predicting criteria, or indicators, of a construct.
For example, when an employer hires new employees, they will examine different criteria that could predict whether or not a prospective hire will be a good fit for a job. People who do well on a test may be more likely to do well at a job, while people with a low score on a test will do poorly at that job. There are two different types of criterion validity: concurrent and predictive.
For example, on a test that measures levels of depression, the test would be said to have concurrent validity if it measured the current levels of depression experienced by the test taker. Predictive validity is when the criterion measures are obtained at a time after the test. Examples of tests with predictive validity are career or aptitude tests , which are helpful in determining who is likely to succeed or fail in certain subjects or occupations. A test has construct validity if it demonstrates an association between the test scores and the prediction of a theoretical trait.
Intelligence tests are one example of measurement instruments that should have construct validity. A valid intelligence test should be able to accurately measure the construct of intelligence rather than other characteristics, such as memory or education level. Essentially, construct validity looks at whether a test covers the full range of behaviors that make up the construct being measured.
The procedure here is to identify necessary tasks to perform a job like typing, design, or physical ability. In order to demonstrate the construct validity of a selection procedure, the behaviors demonstrated in the selection should be a representative sample of the behaviors of the job.
Face validity is one of the most basic measures of validity. Essentially, researchers are simply taking the validity of the test at face value by looking at whether it appears to measure the target variable. I just made this one up today! See how easy it is to be a methodologist? I needed a term that described what both face and content validity are getting at. In essence, both of those validity types are attempting to assess the degree to which you accurately translated your construct into the operationalization, and hence the choice of name.
This is probably the weakest way to try to demonstrate construct validity. For instance, you might look at a measure of math ability, read through the questions, and decide that yep, it seems like this is a good measure of math ability i. We need to rely on our subjective judgment throughout the research process. We can improve the quality of face validity assessment considerably by making it more systematic. For instance, if you are trying to assess the face validity of a math ability measure, it would be more convincing if you sent the test to a carefully selected sample of experts on math ability testing and they all reported back with the judgment that your measure appears to be a good measure of math ability.
In content validity , you essentially check the operationalization against the relevant content domain for the construct. Then, armed with these criteria, we could use them as a type of checklist when examining our program.
But for other constructs e. In criteria-related validity , you check the performance of your operationalization against some criterion. How is this different from content validity? In content validity, the criteria are the construct definition itself — it is a direct comparison. In criterion-related validity, we usually make a prediction about how the operationalization will perform based on our theory of the construct. The differences among the different criterion-related validity types is in the criteria they use as the standard for judgment.
For instance, we might theorize that a measure of math ability should be able to predict how well a person will do in an engineering-based profession. We could give our measure to experienced engineers and see if there is a high correlation between scores on the measure and their salaries as engineers. A high correlation would provide evidence for predictive validity — it would show that our measure can correctly predict something that we theoretically think it should be able to predict.
As such, test scores can only be said to be valid for a particular use. If multiple inferences or decisions are to be made based on a set of Show page numbers Download PDF. Search form icon-arrow-top icon-arrow-top. Page Site Advanced 7 of Edited by: Bruce B.
0コメント