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.
Validity and Reliability
Questions of a study's reliability and validity involve two, separate yet interrelated issues. A study is reliable if it produces consistent results. A study is valid if it measures what it purports to measure. According to the article "Does your coworker know what you're doing? Convergence of self- and peer-reports of counterproductive work behavior" from the International Journal of Stress Management, serious questions of reliability and validity often arise with work-related behavioral surveys, as workers may underreport negative behaviors for fear of reprisals. There are also more generalized problems with self-reportage, namely the tendency to view one's self in excessively favorable or unfavorable terms, or simply to be blind to routine personal behaviors obvious to others.
To ensure that there would be reliable results in a study on the potentially dicey subject of counterproductive work-related behaviors, the study's authors instated a kind of 'peer honesty' control, namely they paired participants, gave the focal or incumbent employee a self-reported survey but also gave a similar survey to a coworker familiar with the incumbent's work situation and behavior. The coworker was physically close to the incumbent at the workplace, and their work-related behaviors were characterized by common supervision, and task interdependency. Presumably, the reliability of the responses between a monitored study and an unmonitored study could be validated by consistent reportage from the peer and the incumbent. This method was also used to control for the study's overall validity: the study would be a more valid measure of counterproductive work actions and their relationship to work stressors if an outside source validated the incumbent's responses.
The study's authors still acknowledge a contradiction: self-reports may be inaccurate or self-serving, yet peer reports may overemphasize the importance of publically observed stressors. Interpersonal conflict is easier to recognize than daydreaming or covert productivity slowdowns, for example. But by soliciting peers and self-reported surveys and classifying different types of stressors, the study's authors hoped to control for such a bias through diversity of responses. Additionally, to reduce fear of reprisals, the surveys were submitted in a completely anonymous fashion, to ensure greater reliability between the surveys as administered in the workplace vs. An outside situation.
Works Cited
Fox, S. & Spector, P.E. (2007). Does your coworker know what you're doing? Convergence of self- and peer-reports of counterproductive work behavior. International Journal of Stress Management, 14(1), 41-60.
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
Adult Learning Assessment Adult learners comprise one of the fastest-growing segments of students today, and adult learners typically have needs that differentiate them from the younger learner. There is already much scholarship devoted to how the adult student learns new information. This understanding of the different learning styles has been taken into consideration in the design of courses and curricula for adult learners. However, teaching tools are only part of the equation.
Validity When conducting a research study, the researcher needs to pay particular attention to the reliability and validity of his or her research instruments. These concepts form the basis of the academic acceptability and even excellence in a study. Hence, any researcher should be concerned with maximizing especially the validity of his or her work. In addition to internal consistency, various forms of validity can be identified, including face validity, content
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
Validity and Reliability Types of Validity According to Trochim (2007), there are six different types of construct validity. Construct validity pertains to the accurate reflection of the operationalization's construct within the conclusion. Of the six types, Trochim (2007) divides them up to translation validity -- which depends on the definition of the construct and the checks against it -- and criterion-related validity -- which applies one's theory of construct and examines the