Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Exploring reliability and validity
Validity and reliability issues
Advantages and disadvantages of reliability in research
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Exploring reliability and validity
Experimental Research of Reliability and Validity
Shawna Anderson
Southwestern College Professional Studies
Reliability and validity are two very important aspects of the research design. These two aspects help researchers gather and measure data in a consistent manner. Reliability is defined as the extent to which the same results over a period of time are accurate and represent the total population and if the results can be duplicated under a similar methodology, then the research is considered reliable There is internal and reliability and external reliability. Internal reliability evaluates the consistency of the results across items within a test. External reliability refers to the degree to which a measure varies
…show more content…
Measurements are only reliable to the extent that they can be repeated and that any random influence that can make measurements different is a source of error. There are many ways to measure both reliability and validity. Some of the ways to measure reliability is test-retest, parallel form, and split-half method. The test-retest measures the results given when the same test is given at different times. Once the both test are administered the results are then compared for consistency. Parallel form is when two different tests are given for measurement over the knowledge is skill level of the test. Split-half method assesses the internal consistency; this is measured to the extent in which all parts of the test contribute equally. Once all the data is measured the test can then be compared for results. Two ways in which validity can be measured is concurrent validity and construct validity. Concurrent validity is the way in which the scores of a test are related to the scores on another test that is administered at the same time. If two test were given how accurate where the test with one another. Once the test is given they can compare each measure of the criterion with each other. Construct Validity is when the construction of the measure of assessment is actually measuring what it claims to measure. This can be in consideration to performance test results. The question of trustworthiness of the research is raised in regards to the …show more content…
This can play a huge role in determining the results and comparing them to a more formal setting. If one assessment was done with a large population of people around and another assessment was done in a more private area or in isolation, would the results differ? There are many factors that can affect reliability and validity. It is very important that factors are controlled as much as possible to reduce their impact. This could be anything from a life event that affects a person’s mood or an environmental event that affects the surroundings of the particular study or research
Validity is extremely weak in this test. It appears that the main issues of this test deals with the weaknesses found in construct, predictive, and content validity. The test had two reviewers, and both agreed that this test was extremely flawed. The first reviewer stated that the CLT’s results were compared to the unknown top four standardized tests of achievement of the time. However, it should be questioned why were these specific tests chosen and what does the results reveal. The CLT did not answer those questions. The tests may or may not have been similar, but because we do not know what the unknown tests measured, the construct validity could be viewed as weak in this regard. The correlations (between .40 and .70) also showed that the data of the CLT yielded similar or different results of the tests that were compared. Or it could measure both result...
Construct Validity: Construct validity refer to how well a measure actually measures the construct it is intended to measure. It is related to the measure capturing the major dimension of the concept under study (Polit& Beck, 2010). The more abstract the concept, the more difficult it is to establish construct validity. Known group validation typically involves demonstrating that some scale can differentiate members of one group from another. The procedures in known group technique consist of an instrument being administered to be high and low on the measured concept.
Another confound that may impact the results of this study could be the testing effect. Repeated testing may lead to better or worse performance. Changes in performance on the test may be due to prior experience with the test and not to the independent variable. In addition, repeated testing fatigues the subjects, and their performance declines as a result (Jackson, 2012). Because the professor is interested in determining if the implementation of weekly quizzes would improve test scores, an experimenter and/or an instrumentation effect may also affect results.
While psychological assessment can be useful, it is merely a tool that provides a piece of a puzzle when assessing individuals. Many things need to be considered in addition to psychological assessment to generate the most accurate results. No individual is exactly the same, therefore a standarized assessment tool will remain flawed. Cultural and linguistic differences are important to acknowledge and understand in efforts to reduce bias in assessment tools.
The traditional approach correlational methods are used to quantify the association among test score and criterion. The PF model differs from traditional validity assessment not only with respect to how validity is conceptualized but also with respect to empirical emphasis. The PF model switches emphasis of validity theory and research from outcome to process and from correlation to experimentation. A process-driven approach and traditional validity assessment can enhance assessment procedures in the psychology field. This can enhance researchers’ knowledge of test score misuse by enlightening the fundamental intra-an interpersonal dynamics that guide to differential performance (and differential prediction) in different groups (Bornstein,
Likewise, in order to validate construct validity, Malhotra et al. (2012) recommends that in conducting research, researchers should use multi versus single-item scales to validate data from experiments, depending upon the complexity of the experiment. Malhotra et al. (2012) also recommends using a step-by-step approach ...
The data gathered during observation sessions are quite reliable; it is often used to confirm the data extracted using other techniques
.... Without knowledge of the reliability and validity of these two instruments we are unable to know if the instruments are consistent or if they measure what they intend to measure.
This is the use of appropriate and used statistics to determine what the research is perceiving. Internal validity is the third form of validity. This is the validity of inferred and found information about the relationships between the elements of the chosen research design and outcomes. The final form of validity is external validity, this form of validity is used to
A researcher uses an experiment to scientifically test out a hypothesis. In an experiment there are many different factors that are involved. There is the independent variable, which is the cause, it is the one that is being manipulated, and the dependent variable, which is the effect, is the response. When conducting a experiment it is important to make sure that the only thing than can affect the dependent variable is the independent variable. This is known as internal validity. Using random assignment to separate the participants into groups helps eliminate any outside factors, and creates an equal chance for all participants to be apart of the experimental conditions. There are many pros and cons to this type of method. The experimental method creates a strong control of the variables involved in the experiment, which allows an easier determination on cause and effect. If needed, it is fairly easy to replicate an experiment and is less time consuming than other research methods. However there are many downfalls as well. When conducting an experiment the setting of where the experiment is taking place is more artificial which may cause certain behaviors that wouldn’t occur in real life. This is known as external validity, which is the measure of how much the results of a study can be generalized and used in different situations, and people. To improve external validity cover stories are created when conducting experiments so the participants are not aware of what is really going on, or experiments are done in a natural setting as opposed to in a laboratory. However, this creates less control over confounding variables that can affect the experiment, which can create bias results (Aronson,
... tested in the same manner for a specified purpose in order to maintain consistency and validity within results.
Assessment is a core component in research. Clinical Psychologists use various types of assessments ...
The fact that all scores are based on consensus between different assessors and assessment techniques at the end of each re test exercise and at the end of the assessment centre means that this form of reliability is very high. Test-retest reliability is also very high, as the competencies being assessed are complex, and the behavior patterns are well established and unlikely to change over time unless a conscious efford is made to do so.
The procedure of Psychological assessment encompasses psychological testing. Instead of relying on the results of one particular test, it incorporates data collected from other sources like interviews, present complaints, information from significant others, behavioural observations, and historical data. The psychological testing is mere administration, scoring, and interpretation of a particular test score (usually numeric) that gives us an idea of an attribute or characteristic; whereas psychological assessment is a logical problem-solving process, that can be therapeutic for the client and help them realize their potentials and achieve their goals (Cohen & Swerdlik, 2009; Hood & Johnson, 2007). The process of psychological assessment is more individualized, however psychological test involves an individual or a group administration (Cohen & Swerdlik, 2009). The process of psychological assessment is a complex procedure as compare to psychological testing (Weiner, 2003) that according to M...