Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Convergent validity in the behavioral sciences refers to the degree to which two measures that theoretically should be related, are in fact related. [1] Convergent validity, along with discriminant validity, is a subtype of construct validity. Convergent validity can be established if two similar constructs correspond with one another, while ...
The multitrait-multimethod (MTMM) matrix is an approach to examining construct validity developed by Campbell and Fiske (1959). [1] It organizes convergent and discriminant validity evidence for comparison of how a measure relates to other measures. The conceptual approach has influenced experimental design and measurement theory in psychology ...
Convergent validity between the QABF and the Motivation Assessment Scale (MAS) appears to be strongest, while convergent validity with analogue functional analyses appears to be lower than expected. [ 3 ] [ 4 ] Research suggests that since many behaviors may be contingent on multiple factors, [ 5 ] measures such as the Functional Assessment for ...
The phenomenon where validity is sacrificed to increase reliability is known as the attenuation paradox. [35] [36] A high value of reliability can conflict with content validity. To achieve high content validity, each item should comprehensively represent the content to be measured.
Convergent validity refers to the observation of strong correlations between two tests that are assumed to measure the same construct. It is the interpretation of the focal test as a predictor that differentiates this type of evidence from convergent validity, though both methods rely on simple correlations in the statistical analysis.
In statistics, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) is a special form of factor analysis, most commonly used in social science research. [1] It is used to test whether measures of a construct are consistent with a researcher's understanding of the nature of that construct (or factor).
Cohen's kappa measures the agreement between two raters who each classify N items into C mutually exclusive categories. The definition of is =, where p o is the relative observed agreement among raters, and p e is the hypothetical probability of chance agreement, using the observed data to calculate the probabilities of each observer randomly selecting each category.
The validity of a measurement tool (for example, a test in education) is the degree to which the tool measures what it claims to measure. [3] Validity is based on the strength of a collection of different types of evidence (e.g. face validity, construct validity, etc.) described in greater detail below.