The three important elements in any research design should be the validity, reliability and generalizability of the researcher’s finding. Creditable goes along ways and weighs heavy in the research world.
Validity in research is measures on how much truth lies in the research by the proper tools in place for accuracy and truthfulness of scientific finding (1993). There are four different approaches to validity: face validity, content validity, criterion validity, and construct validity (2012). Validity is just like testing the hypothesis to see how much the research is valid base on its methodology; the data will be sample and analyze to self-check the outcome. It should display what actually exist and a valid mechanism or measure what it is supposed to be measure (1993). If there are any discrepancies, for example, the methodology is not right, the research will be deemed to be not valid in its state.
Reliability depends on the duplication of the research process to see if the researchers receive the same results over repeated testing periods (1993). There are several reliability testing like test-retest, inter-item (internal consistency), alternate forms, and interobserver reliability (2012). Reliability shows that there may be some errors of inconsistency with the research to render the same information over and over again. The researcher must use the same or comparable method to obtain the same results as the original researcher. With the consistent
In reviewing this article, this writer was able critique the study and the suitability that it can possess if applied to actual practice. An important factor on whether a study can be considered valuable is if it is transferable in other situation, that is, a study's results should also be reflective if duplicated on other samples (Polit & Beck, 2006). Thus, the statistical power, internal and external validity are important to observe and note (Polit & Beck). If this writer were to carry out this study, it would have to be reflective of how the researcher performed it originality.
Validity refers to whether the research conducted is what it intended to be. Validity involves dependability, which means, a valid measure must be reliable. But, reliability doesn’t have to link to validity, a reliable measure is not required to be valid.
Why is internal consistency such an easy way to assess reliability from a methodological perspective?
A research critique aims to measure the value and significance of a study. These are determined by
While the methodology of the research seemed solid, there were factors which were out of the control of the researchers which made the process more difficult to verify. Because the researchers chose a public web forum, they were unable to verify the legitimacy
Now, it is time to give an overview of some of the design threats to construct validity. If the researcher did not define the construct efficiently than it can lead to the inadequate preoperational explication of constructs threat (Trochim & Donnelly, 2008). Next, is the mono-operation bias, which is the use of the study program only one time and one place (Trochim & Donnelly, 2008). Third, the mono-method bias is the use of any one measure or observation (Trochim & Donnelly, 2008). Finally, the confounding constructs and the levels of constructs threat (Trochim & Donnelly, 2008). Overall, this threat to construct validity is a labeling issue like some of the other threats to construct validity (Trochim & Donnelly, 2008). However, there are more design threats than listed in this paper to construct
For any measure to be valuable in psychological research, it needs to be both valid and reliable (Goodwin, 2008: 128). Research is reliable when more researchers have found the same results, or, within for instance behavioural research, when the same behaviour occurs at several measurements (Goodwin, 2008: 124). There are different types of validity. Firstly, there is construct validity, which measures whether an operationalisation of a construct actually measures what it is supposed to measure. Secondly, criterion validity determines whether a certain phenomenon is related to another phenomenon, and can accurately determine future developments. Lastly, content validity determines whether a test measures all aspects of the construct that is being measured (Goodwin, 2008: 125-126).
In the text book, “Theories and Research of Personality” written by Daniel Cervone and Lawrence A. Pervin, the authors talk about the goals to research and they are referring to reliability, validity, and ethical behavior. With reliability, the author is referring to the “extent to which observations can be replicated and whether the measures of the research are dependable or stable” (Cervone, Pervin 43, 2013). Reliability is extremely important to have when conducting research because if the research conducted is not reliable then when trying to get research out to people, other psychologists will not believe what you are trying to get across and in the long term affecting ones career. Also Cervone and Pervin talk about validity which is,
Validity deals with determining “how well the instrument reflects the abstract concept being examined.” (Burns & Grove, 2011) In critiquing the validity of the Brunner et al. (2012) article, they used a quasi-experimental, two-group study without a control group to conduct their study. Their study examined two skin care products used to prevent skin breakdown in acute and critical care patients with various lengths of stay. According to Brunner et al. (2012), nurses approach skin care in various
In psychological assessment of any kind, validity is defined as “the degree to which all the accumulated evidence supports the intended
There is no specific section discussing reliability and validity in this study. Although there was no specific section or heading, throughout this study, the authors did consult with the advisory committee at multiple points and the authors do lists that as a limitation that this study is not generalizable. Main findings were also discussed and verified with the community advisory committee for accuracy of
Validity is the degree to which an instrument measure what it is purports to measure. Invalid instruments can lead to erroneous research conclusions, which in turn can influence educational decisions. Reliability is the internal consistency or stability of the measuring device
Validity refers to that measuring tool or approaches can accurately measure things needed to be measured. It can be considered as an extent that measured results reflect investigative contents. Measured results more tend to be identical, validity will be higher, vice versa. Guba and Lincoln (1981) argued that whole social research must include invalidity in order to acquire worthwhile data within both the rationalistic paradigm (quantitative research) and naturalistic paradigm (qualitative research). Some factors can determine the level of validity, which include bias, construct
The manual discusses internal consistency and test-retest in terms of reliability. Internal consistency is measuring how scores on individual items relate to each other or to the test as a whole. In two subsample studies, high internal consistency was found. In the first study, with a mixed sample of 160 outpatients, Beck, Epstein et al. (1988) reported that the BAI had high internal consistency reliability (Cronbach coefficient alpha = .92), and Fydrich et al. found a slightly higher level of internal consistency (coefficient alpha = .94). This means that the items on the BAI are all measuring the same variable, anxiety.
Reliability is defined, within psychometric testing, as the stability of a research study or measure(s). Reliability can be examined externally, Inter-rater and Test-Retest, as well as internally; which is seen in internal consistency reliability methods.