Chap 4 VALIDITY 1 VALIDITY DEFINITION AND EVOLVING

Chap 4. . VALIDITY 1 VALIDITY: DEFINITION AND EVOLVING CONCEPTS BALAJI NIWLIKAR SP COLLEGE, PUNE. https: //www. careershodh. com/

Validity 2 It refers to the meaning and usefulness of test results. “Does the test measure what it is supposed to measure? ” More specifically, validity refers to the degree to which a certain inference or interpretation based on a test is appropriate. There are three types of evidence: (1) construct-related, (2) criterion-related, and (3) content-related. https: //www. careershodh. com/

Validity: Definition and evolving concepts 3 Concept of validity by Kelly (1927) What the test measures and how well it does. “a test is valid if it measures what it claims to measures. ” Ex – Consensciousness. Actual concept ? Aspects of concept ? Def – “Validity is the degree to which evidence and theory supports the interpretation of test scores entailed by the uses of the test. ” “An index of validity shows the degree to which test measures what to measure when compared with accepted criterion” -Freeman https: //www. careershodh. com/

Validity: evolving concepts 4 1 st --Earliest uses of tests was in the assessment of what individual had learned. now it is on the end of course. Ex. Sem end. For achievement test –comparing its content with content domain designed to assess. It is still relevant/ apllicable 2 nd stage –shift to prediction How will people respond in given situation- now & future Here test validity means correlation coefficient between test scores and direct & independent measures of that criterion Useful in selection and placement -education, job, treatment etc. https: //www. careershodh. com/

Validity: evolving concepts 5 3 rd Current stage- 2 major trends 1. Strengthen theoretical orientation 2. A close link between psychological theory and verification through empirical and & experimental hypothesis testing These trends recognized the value of construct Construct – broad category Derived from the common feature shared by directly observable behavior. Theoretical entities , not directly observed It leads to introduction of construct validity as fundamental and all inclusive validity https: //www. careershodh. com/

Face Validity 6 Simplest. Face validity is the mere appearance that a measure has validity. Items should be reasonably related to the perceived purpose of the test. For ability and achievement tests. Ex -, a scale to measure anxiety Items – “My stomach gets upset when I think about taking tests” “My heart starts pounding fast whenever I think about future. ” If they say ‘yes’ to both question can we conclude that person is anxious? No--validity requires evidence in order to justify conclusions Face validity is really not validity at all bcoz it does not offer evidence to support conclusions drawn from test scores. It is crucial to have a test that “looks like” it is valid. These appearances can help to motivate test takers by showing relevance. https: //www. careershodh. com/

Content-description validation procedures 7 Systematic examination of test content to determine whether it covers a representative sample of all behavior domain to be measured. This valorization procedure used in test design to measure how well person mastered the skill. Domain should be fully described in advance. Content must be defined broadly to include major objectives- application of principles , the interpretation of data , factual knowledge. Validity depend on person test response to the behavior area under consideration rather than on appearance of item content. Specific procedure Choice of appropriate items Systematic examination of course syllabi , textbook Consultation of SMEs Test specification – content areas , instruction objectives/process, important of individual topics , no of items Discussion of content validation should be the manual. Empirical procedure-total scores and item scores. Supplementary procedure –analysis of types of errors Application –educational and achievement test , employee selection and classification Inappropriate for aptitude and personality test https: //www. careershodh. com/

Content-description validation procedures 8 It considers the adequacy of representation of the conceptual domain the test is 1. designed to cover. Traditionally, content validity evidence has been of greatest concern in educational testing. Its unique features- it is logical rather than statistical. Like face validity. For establishing content validity - requires good logic, intuitive skills, and perseverance. Two new concepts. Construct underrepresentation describes the failure to capture important components of a construct. For example, if a test of mathematical knowledge included algebra but not geometry, the validity of the test would be threatened by construct underrepresentation. Construct-irrelevant variance occurs when scores are influenced by factors irrelevant to the construct. 2. For example, a test of intelligence might be influenced by reading comprehension , test anxiety, or illness. Limitations – For example, many students do poorly on tests because of anxiety or reading problems https: //www. careershodh. com/

Criterion-Related Evidence for Validity 9 Criterion validity evidence tells us just how well a test corresponds with a particular criterion. A criterion is the standard against which the test is compared. For example, a test might be used to predict which engaged couples will have successful marriages and which ones will get divorced. Marital success - criterion, Predictive validity- The forecasting function of tests is actually a type or form of criterion validity evidence known as predictive validity evidence. The SAT, including its quantitative and verbal subtests, is the predictor variable, and the college grade point average (GPA) is the criterion. The purpose of the test is to predict the likelihood of succeeding on the criterion—i. e. , achieving a high GPA in college. https: //www. careershodh. com/

Concurrent validity 10 Concurrent related evidence for validity comes from assessments of the simultaneous relationship between the test and the criterion— such as between a learning disability test and school performance. Concurrent evidence for validity applies when the test and the criterion can be measured at the same time. Most in industrial sector. The Strong-Campbell Interest Inventory (SCII) uses as criteria patterns of interest among people who are satisfied with their careers (Campbell, 1977). https: //www. careershodh. com/

Validity coefficient 11 It is the relationship between a test and a criterion is usually expressed as a correlation. This coefficient tells the extent to which the test is valid for making statements about the criterion. validity coefficients in the range of. 30 to. 40 are commonly considered high. And coefficient is statistically significant or not is important. Issues of concern when interpreting validity coefficients. Look for changes in the cause of relationships. The logic of criterion validation presumes that the causes of the relationship between the test and the criterion will still exist when the test is in use. What does the criterion mean? Criterion-related validity studies mean nothing at all unless the criterion is valid and reliable. https: //www. careershodh. com/

Construct-Validity 12 By the mid-1950 s, investigators concluded that no clear criteria existed for most of the social and psychological characteristics they wanted to measure. Ex- measure of intelligence, love, curiosity, or mental health. there was no criterion for intelligence because it is a hypothetical construct. A construct is defined as something built by mental synthesis. As a construct, intelligence does not exist as a separate thing we can touch or feel, so it cannot be used as an objective criterion. Construct validity can established through a series of activities in which a researcher simultaneously defines some construct and develops the instrumentation to measure it. https: //www. careershodh. com/

Construct validity 13 Construct validation involves assembling evidence about what a test means. This is done by showing the relationship between a test and other tests and measures. Years ago, D. T. Campbell and Fiske (1959) introduced an important set of logical considerations for establishing evidence of construct validity. They distinguished between two types of evidence essential for a meaningful test: convergent and divergent /discriminant. Convergent validity -When a measure correlates well with other tests believed to measure the same construct, convergent evidence for validity is obtained. In each case, scores on the test are related to scores on some other measure. However , there is no criterion to define what we are attempting to measure. https: //www. careershodh. com/

Construct validity 14 Convergent validity is obtained in one of two ways. we show that a test measures the same things as other tests used for the same purpose. 2. we demonstrate specific relationships that we can expect if the test is really doing its job. Divergent /Discriminant validity shows that the measure does not include superfluous items and that the test measures something distinct from other tests. 1. https: //www. careershodh. com/