Uploaded on:
Category: Medical / Health
Legitimacy Definitions Degree to which a test measures what it implies to gauge Degree to which a test is utilized as a part of a fair-minded, just, and impartial way Legitimacy is the thing that the test measures and how well it does as such (Anastasi, 1954)
Slide 1


Slide 2

Definitions Extent to which a test measures what it implies to quantify Extent to which a test is utilized as a part of an unprejudiced, just, and fair way Validity is the thing that the test measures and how well it does as such (Anastasi, 1954) A test is substantial to the extent that we know what it gauges or predicts (Cronbach, 1954) Validity = dependability

Slide 3

Validity Process Validity is resolved through a continuous process not a solitary score or choice: through hypothesis and speculations through relationships, relapses, and element investigation through an examination of the results Validity is a normal for test scores and their utilization, not of the test itself

Slide 4

3 Traditional Methods Content legitimacy Construct legitimacy Criterion-related legitimacy prescient & simultaneous Logical Empirical

Slide 5

What is Content Validity? Are the practices inspected by the test illustrative of the trait being surveyed? Am I completely measuring what I think I am measuring? Steps: Describe the substance area Identify areas measured by the test\'s Compare the test structure with the substance space to break down representativeness

Slide 6

Determining Content Validity Primary result is a judgment about how well the test specimens the substance spaces of the credit No factual tests to focus Easier to survey for solid areas Facts versus conceptual/complex ideas

Slide 7

Content Validity Strategies What would you be able to do to guarantee a high level of substance legitimacy? Adjust substance to principles painstakingly Engage numerous partners in the improvement and reviewing procedure Seek space particular master supposition

Slide 8

What is Construct Validity? What are Constructs? names connected with speculative dynamic ideas, yet at the same time associated with perceptible elements Why are they imperative? develops are the focal means we have for uniting operations in exploration to dialect groups they regularly convey social and political ramifications the naming of things is a key issue for all sciences

Slide 9

Construct Validity Does a test give a decent measure of the build of hobby? Generally a continuous procedure that includes persistent improvement and change and refinement Takes the type of a contention, introducing confirmation for and against

Slide 10

Construct Validity Construct explanation distinguish practices identified with build (focalized legitimacy) recognize different develops and choose on the off chance that they are connected or not (discriminant legitimacy) Establish nomological systems recognize practices identified with each extra build and evaluate connections interrelated laws supporting a build

Slide 11

Types of Construct Validity Convergent legitimacy the connection between\'s “like” practices/measures/builds (e.g., comparative or the same builds) Discriminant legitimacy the connection between\'s “unlike” or unique measures

Slide 12

Calculating Construct Validity Correlate scores on test with different measures or tests It ought to have huge relationships with comparable practices or tests (joined) It ought to be random to not at all like, divergent practices or tests (discriminant) Factor examination (unidimensionality)

Slide 13

Example: Construct of Love Define affection Grounded in existing hypothetical and mainstream originations of adoration Measure it exceedingly between associated things ( r = .85) component investigation survey its relationship to comparable and disparate variables, i.e., contempt, as, (discriminant)

Slide 14

Convergent Positive relationship to ‘in loveness scale’ Positive relationship to ‘probability of wedding coefficient’ Positive relationship to ‘never felt this before coefficient’ Positive association with ‘gazing adoringly’ Discriminant Positive yet distinctive relationship to self reported ‘friendness coefficient’ (i.e. like, not love) Negative relationship to ‘hate coefficient’ Negative relationship to ‘social attractive quality scale’ Positive relationship to ‘glancing’ Example: Love (think proof) Herman (2004)

Slide 15

Convergence Correlation Matrix Herman (2004)

Slide 16

Discriminant Correlation Matrix Keith Herman (2004)

Slide 17

What is Criterion Validity? Judgment with respect to how well a test can be utilized to construe an individual’s remaining on a measure of interest (the standard). Foundation ought to be solid, significant, and substantial. The essential concern is forecast: how well the test predicts the basis of hobby.

Slide 18

Types of Criterion Validity Predictive (after some time) take after subjects over the long haul constrained by time and achievability Concurrent (in the meantime) single point in time and pre-chosen subjects impediments: confined extent

Slide 19

The Language of Validity of Inferences inside the test relationship to different tests interior outside (generalizeability) build content measure custom merged discriminant dependability simultaneous prescient between rater parallel structures inner test retest when we discuss legitimacy we are tending to reasons why we may not trust inductions

Slide 20

Wrap-up Validity is a mind boggling, developing judgment about the quality surmisings produced using test scores Recent consideration has concentrated not just on the psychometric properties of a test (i.e., unwavering quality and ordinary legitimacy) additionally on the social outcomes identified with test utilization Awareness of social results of evaluation is basic for

View more...