Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
¶ … xml.rels word/Document.xml
Definition and Description of Basic Concepts Error of measurement Measuring devices make approximate measurement(s). If an object is measured twice at different times, the two obtained measurements may not be accurate. This difference between the measurements is called error of measurement. This error, however, is not considered a mistake or the incorrect measurement. In fact, the error in measurement is a numerical method for showing that measurements are not certain. In simple words, error of measurement is the variation between the measurement result and the correct value of the object that is being measured. According to recent studies, "the measurement error affects the repeatability of MMN" (Paukkunen, Leminen & Sepponen, 2011, p. 2195) (mismatch negativity). Test-retest Reliability Test-retest reliability is the estimate between scores from the similar respondents tested at dissimilar times (MacQuarrie, Applegate & Lacefield, 2008). It demonstrates the reliability and evenness of an instrument's score in due course. It means that an instrument is reliable if the results obtained are close. It is the most simplest and renowned survey reliability indicator/marker of an instrument. Split-Half Reliability This term refers to an investigational mean that is used for the evaluation of a measurement instrument's reliability. The items are assigned to two "split halves" at random and the scores inter-correlation obtained from both halves is then calculated. The consistency of results means that the two halves have the same measurement. Split-half reliability can thus be described as a means of calculating the approximate reliability of an instrument (Kaplan & Saccuzzo, 2005, p. 109). Internal Consistency An instrument is referred to have internal consistency when its items calculate/determine the identical attributes of an object. Internal consistency of an instrument gives the instrument the kind of reliability that...
Thus, an instrument is considered as valid when its scores strongly match up with the criterion scores (Brazeau, Teatero, Rawana & Blanchette, 2012). Validity Coefficient After the establishment of a criterion, the estimation of an instrument's validity is easy. The estimation of a validity coefficient is done with the use of a mathematic formula that compares the instrument scores with the criterion variable scores. Thus, validity coefficients are the indicators of the extent of relationship that is present between the individuals' scores measured by two dissimilar instruments (Kaplan & Saccuzzo, 2005). Construct Validity refers to the extent to which a measure shows a relationship with other measures as supposed to be parallel with in a theoretical manner. It is used for testing the speculative structure within which it is expected that the instrument will achieve the results. It is a challenge to validate an instrument when construct validity is involved. It is important to note here that factor analysis was responsible for establishing the construct validity (Chen & Lo, 2007). Criterion Validity An instrument is said to possess criterion validity on the condition that it presents identical results when compared with the results of another instrument that is specifically used to determine the same variable. Such validity involves measurement of objects at multiple times. Evaluation is done by making a comparison between the authentic measurements with a decisive factor known to be the criterion variable (Kaplan & Saccuzzo, 2005, p. 137). Content Validity This kind of validity is related with the comprehensiveness (breadth, depth, width, range) of an instrument. It also refers to the adequacy of an instrument and how well it mirrors a complete aim (Kaplan & Saccuzzo, 2005, p. 136). When an instrument is not reliable, it means that it contains extra errors and cannot be regarded as a valid marker of the variable…
References Brazeau, J.N., Teatero, M.L., Rawana, E.P., & Blanchette, L.R. (2012). The Strengths Assessment Inventory: Reliability of a New Measure of Psychosocial Strengths for Youth. Journal of Child & Family Studies, 21, 384-390. Chen, C., & Lo, L. (2007). Reliability and Validity of a Chinese Version of the Pediatric Asthma Symptoms Scale. Journal of Nursing Research, 15 (2), 99-105. Kaplan, R.M., & Saccuzzo, D.P. (2005). Psychological Testing: Principles (6 ed.). Canada: Wadsworth. MacQuarrie, D., Applegate, B., & Lacefield, W. (2008). Criterion Referenced Assessment: Establishing Content Validity of Complex Skills Related to Specific Tasks. Journal of Career and Technical Education, 24 (2), 6-29. Paukkunen, A.K., Leminen, M., & Sepponen, R. (2011). The Effect of Measurement Error on the Test -- Retest Reliability of Repeated Mismatch Negativity Measurements. Clinical Neurophysiology, 122, 2195-2202. Polit, D.F., & Beck, C.T. (2008). Nursing Research: Generating and Assessing Evidence for Nursing Practice . Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer Health/lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
word/numbering.xml word/styles.xml [Content_Types].xml
Reliability & Validity For the lay person, the notion of personality is often derived from components of an individual's character or make up that has the ability to elicit positive or negative reactions from other individuals. The person who has a propensity for positive reactions from others is often thought to have a 'good' personality. Conversely, the person who tends to elicit not so favorable reactions from others may be thought
Reliability of Test Reliability is defined by Joppe (2002,p.1) as the level of consistency of the obtained results over a period of time as well as an accurate representation of the population under study. If the outcome of the study can be reproduced using a similar methodology then the instrument used in the research are said to be reliable. It is worth noticing that there is an element of replicability as well
Reliability and Validity Trochim (2007) examines validity and reliability in the context of arriving at measures for constructs that firstly measure what they purport to measure. Secondly, the measures do what they purport to do in a consistent manner so that the researcher can have confidence in the measurement and hence the research project is not compromised. The elements of validity and reliability are pivotal concerns to research. Research thrives in
moderate impairment), while dependent variables included the levels of measured performance on the test. Operationalization involved demonstrating the ability to perform the tasks of daily life. Simple cooking was tested by asking the test subject to cook oatmeal; using a telephone was tested by requiring the subject to inquire about grocery delivery on the phone; and the test subject was required to select and administer medications correctly and select
Having evidence demonstrated over a number of different trials at different schools, each with similar results contributes to external validity. Thus, the trials must all be for universities, as opposed to careers for example, so that the results of those trials are transferable to our university's admissions process. To ensure internal validity, the admissions test must include a sufficient number of questions (data points) to establish a clear trend. The questions
Reliability, validity and norming sample populations play critical roles in the usefulness of assessment instruments used in forensics assessments. These three facets of assessment help to determine whether or not the results the assessment yield is credible. Additionally, they each help to evaluate a particular aspect of an instrument, although there is generally a degree of correlation between these factors. Validity is simply the accuracy of a test to effectively measure