Good day! I am in the midst of completing my test development requirement under the Psychological Assessment subject. I was wondering if anyone can help me reach experts or psychology graduates who can rate whether or not the items for the test I have developed are necessary in order for me to assess the content validity. Your support is highly appreciated. Thank you!
Hi Dj Edarl Jupia Nazario ,
Content validity refers to the degree or extent to which a test consists items representing the behaviours that the test maker wants to measure. The extent to which the items of a test are true representative of the whole content and the objectives of the teaching is called the content validity of the test.
Article The Impact of Test Content Validity on Language Teaching and Learning
Article A Model-Based Method for Content Validation of Automatically...
Article Theory of Mind Test for Children: Content Validity
Validity of a Test: 6 Types | Statistics
The following six types of validity are popularly in use viz., Face validity, Content validity, Predictive validity, Concurrent, Construct and Factorial validity. Out of these, the content, predictive, concurrent and construct validity are the important ones used in the field of psychology and education.
These are discussed below:
Type # 1. Face Validity:
Face Validity to the extent the test appears to measure what is to be measured.
Face validity refers to whether a test appears to be valid or not i.e., from external appearance whether the items appear to measure the required aspect or not. If a test measures what the test author desires to measure, we say that the test has face validity. Thus, face validity refers not to what the test measures, but what the test ‘appears to measure’. The content of the test should not obviously appear to be inappropriate, irrelevant.
For example, a test to measure “Skill in addition” should contain only items on addition. When one goes through the items and feels that all the items appear to measure the skill in addition, then it can be said that the test is validated by face.
Although it is not an efficient method of assessing the validity of a test and as such it is not usually used still then it can be used as a first step in validating the test. Once the test is validated at face, we may proceed further to compute validity coefficient.
Moreover, this method helps a test maker to revise the test items to suit to the purpose. When a test is to be constructed quickly or when there is an urgent need of a test and there is no time or scope to determine the validity by other efficient methods, face validity can be determined.
This type of validity is not adequate as it operates at the facial level and hence may be used as a last resort.
Type # 2. Content Validity:
Content Validity a process of matching the test items with the instructional objectives.
Content validity is the most important criterion for the usefulness of a test, especially of an achievement test. It is also called as Rational Validity or Logical Validity or Curricular Validity or Internal Validity or Intrinsic Validity.
Content validity refers to the degree or extent to which a test consists items representing the behaviours that the test maker wants to measure. The extent to which the items of a test are true representative of the whole content and the objectives of the teaching is called the content validity of the test.
📷
Content validity is estimated by evaluating the relevance of the test items; i.e. the test items must duly cover all the content and behavioural areas of the trait to be measured. It gives idea of subject matter or change in behaviour.
This way, content validity refers to the extent to which a test contains items representing the behaviour that we are going to measure. The items of the test should include every relevant characteristic of the whole content area and objectives in right proportion.
Before constructing the test, the test maker prepares a two-way table of content and objectives, popularly known as “Specification Table”.
Suppose an achievement test in Mathematics is prepared. It must contain items from Algebra, Arithmetic, Geometry, Mensuration and Trigonometry and moreover the items must measure the different behavioural objectives like knowledge, understanding, skill, application etc. So it is imperative that due weightage be given to different content area and objectives.
An example of ‘specification table’ in Mathematics is shown in following table:
📷
The Table reflects the sample of learning tasks to be measured. The closer the test items correspond to the specified sample, the greater the possibility of having satisfactory content validity. Therefore, it is desirable that the items in a test are screened by a team of experts. They should check whether the placement of the various items in the cells of the Table is appropriate and whether all the cells of the Table have an adequate number of items.
The adequacy is to be judged in terms of the weightage given to the different content-by-objective Table according to the team of experts who have designed the curriculum.
Some general points for ensuring content validity are given below:
1. Test should serve the required level of students, neither above nor below their standard.
2. Language should be upto the level of students.
3. Anything which is not in the curriculum should not be included in test items.
4. Each part of the curriculum should be given necessary weightage. More items should be selected from more important parts of the curriculum.
Limitations:
1. The weightage to be given to different parts of content is subjective.
2. It is difficult to construct the perfect objective test.
3. Content validity is not sufficient or adequate for tests of Intelligence, Achievement, Attitude and to some extent tests of Personality.
4. Weightage given on different behaviour change is not objective.
Type # 3. Predictive Validity:
Predictive Validity the extent to which test predicts the future performance of students.
Predictive validity is concerned with the predictive capacity of a test. It indicates the effectiveness of a test in forecasting or predicting future outcomes in a specific area. The test user wishes to forecast an individual’s future performance. Test scores can be used to predict future behaviour or performance and hence called as predictive validity.
In order to find predictive validity, the tester correlates the test scores with testee’s subsequent performance, technically known as “Criterion”. Criterion is an independent, external and direct measure of that which the test is designed to predict or measure. Hence, it is also known as “Criterion related Validity”.
The predictive or empirical validity has been defined by Cureton (1965) as an estimate of the correlation coefficient between the test scores and the true criterion.
An example can clarify the concept better.
Example:
Medical entrance test is constructed and administered to select candidate for admission into M.B.B.S. courses. Basing on the scores made by the candidates on this test we admit the candidates.
After completion of the course they appear at the final M.B.B.S. examination. The scores of final M.B.B.S. examination is the criterion. The scores of entrance test and final examination (criterion) are correlated. High correlation implies high predictive validity.
Similar examples like other recruitment tests or entrance tests in Agriculture, Engineering, Banking, Railway etc. could be cited here which must have high predictive validity.
That is tests used for recruitment, classification and entrance examination must have high predictive validity. This type of validity is sometimes referred to as ‘Empirical validity’ or ‘Statistical validity’ as our evaluation is primarily empirical and statistical.
Limitation:
If we get a suitable criterion-measure with which our test results are to be correlated, we can determine the predictive validity of a test. But it is very difficult to get a good criterion. Moreover, we may not get criterion-measures for all types of psychological tests.
Type # 4. Concurrent Validity:
Concurrent Validity correlating the test scores with another set of criterion scores.
Concurrent validity refers to the extent to which the test scores correspond to already established or accepted performance, known as criterion. To know the validity of a newly constructed test, it is correlated or compared with some available information.
Thus a test is validated against some concurrently available information. The scores obtained from a newly constructed test are correlated with pre-established test performance. Suppose we have prepared a test of intelligence.
We administer it to group of pupils. The Stanford-Binet test is also administered to the same group. Now test scores made on our newly constructed test and test scores made by pupils on the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Test are correlated. If the coefficient of correlation is high, our intelligence test is said to have high concurrent validity.
The dictionary meaning of the term ‘concurrent’ is ‘existing’ or ‘done at the same time’. Thus the term ‘concurrent validity’ is used to indicate the process of validating a new test by correlating its scores with some existing or available source of information (criterion) which might have been obtained shortly before or shortly after the new test is given.
To ascertain the concurrent validity of an achievement test constructed freshly, its scores are correlated with the scores obtained by those same students in their recent first-terminal or terminal examination. Thus a test is validated against some concurrently available information. To get a criterion measure, we are not required to wait for a long time.
The predictive validity differs from concurrent validity in the sense that in former validity we wait for the future to get criterion measure. But in ease of concurrent validity we need not wait for longer gaps.
The term ‘concurrent’ here implies the following characteristics:
1. The two tests—the one whose validity is being examined and the one with proven validity—are supposed to cover the same content area at a given level and the same objective;
2. The population for both the tests remains the same and the two tests are administered in almost similar environments; and
3. The performance data on both the tests are obtainable almost simultaneously.
This type of validity is also known as “External Validity” or “Functional Validity”. Concurrent validity is relevant to tests employed for diagnosis not for prediction of future success.
Type # 5. Construct Validity:
Construct Validity the extent is which the test may be said to measure a theoretical construct or psychological variable.
A construct is mainly psychological. Usually it refers to a trait or mental process. Construct validation is the process of determining the extent to which a particular test measures the psychological constructs that the test maker intends to measure.
It indicates the extent to which a test measures the abstract attributes or qualities which are not operationally defined.
Gronlund and Linn states,” Construct validation maybe defined as the process of determining the extent to which the test performance can be interpreted in terms of one or more psychological construct.”
Ebel and Frisbie describes, “Construct validation is the process of gathering evidence to support the contention that a given test indeed measures the psychological construct that the test makers intended for it to measure.”
ADVERTISEMENTS:
Construct validity is also known as “Psychological Validity” or ‘Trait Validity’ or ‘Logical Validity’. Construct validity means that the test scores are examined in terms of a construct. It studies the construct or psychological attributes that a test measures.
The extent to which the test measures the personality traits or mental processes as defined by the test-maker is known as the construct validity of the test.
While constructing tests on intelligence, attitude, mathematical aptitude, critical thinking, study skills, anxiety, logical reasoning, reading comprehension etc. we have to go for construct validity. Take for example, ‘a test of sincerity’.
Before constructing such types of test the test maker is confronted with the questions:
1. What should be the definition of the term sincerity?
2. What types of behaviour are to be expected from a person who is sincere?
3. What type of behaviour distinguishes between sincerity and insincerity?
Each construct has an underlying theory that can be brought to bear in describing and predicting a pupil’s behaviour.
Gronlund (1981) suggests the following three steps for determining construct validity:
(i) Identify the constructs presumed to account for test performance.
(ii) Derive hypotheses regarding test performance from the theory underlying each construct.
(iii) Verify the hypotheses by logical and empirical means.
It must be noted that construct validity is inferential. It is used primarily when other types of validity are insufficient to indicate the validity of the test. Construct validity is usually involved in such as those of study habits, appreciation, honesty, emotional stability, sympathy etc.
Type # 6. Factorial Validity:
Factorial Validity the extent of correlation of the different factors with the whole test.
Factorial validity is determined by a statistical technique known as factor analysis. It uses methods of explanation of inter-correlations to identify factors (which may be verbalised as abilities) constituting the test.
In other words methods of inter-correlation and other statistical methods are used to estimate factorial validity. The correlation of the test with each factor is calculated to determine the weight contributed by each such factor to the total performance of the test.
This tells us about the factor loadings. This relationship of the different factors with the whole test is called the factorial validity. Guilford (1950) suggested that factorial validity is the clearest description of what a test measures and by all means should be given preference over other types of validity.
i hope it is helpful to you.
best wishes
Hi Dj Edarl Jupia Nazario ,
Content validity refers to the degree or extent to which a test consists items representing the behaviours that the test maker wants to measure. The extent to which the items of a test are true representative of the whole content and the objectives of the teaching is called the content validity of the test.
Article The Impact of Test Content Validity on Language Teaching and Learning
Article A Model-Based Method for Content Validation of Automatically...
Article Theory of Mind Test for Children: Content Validity
Validity of a Test: 6 Types | Statistics
The following six types of validity are popularly in use viz., Face validity, Content validity, Predictive validity, Concurrent, Construct and Factorial validity. Out of these, the content, predictive, concurrent and construct validity are the important ones used in the field of psychology and education.
These are discussed below:
Type # 1. Face Validity:
Face Validity to the extent the test appears to measure what is to be measured.
Face validity refers to whether a test appears to be valid or not i.e., from external appearance whether the items appear to measure the required aspect or not. If a test measures what the test author desires to measure, we say that the test has face validity. Thus, face validity refers not to what the test measures, but what the test ‘appears to measure’. The content of the test should not obviously appear to be inappropriate, irrelevant.
For example, a test to measure “Skill in addition” should contain only items on addition. When one goes through the items and feels that all the items appear to measure the skill in addition, then it can be said that the test is validated by face.
Although it is not an efficient method of assessing the validity of a test and as such it is not usually used still then it can be used as a first step in validating the test. Once the test is validated at face, we may proceed further to compute validity coefficient.
Moreover, this method helps a test maker to revise the test items to suit to the purpose. When a test is to be constructed quickly or when there is an urgent need of a test and there is no time or scope to determine the validity by other efficient methods, face validity can be determined.
This type of validity is not adequate as it operates at the facial level and hence may be used as a last resort.
Type # 2. Content Validity:
Content Validity a process of matching the test items with the instructional objectives.
Content validity is the most important criterion for the usefulness of a test, especially of an achievement test. It is also called as Rational Validity or Logical Validity or Curricular Validity or Internal Validity or Intrinsic Validity.
Content validity refers to the degree or extent to which a test consists items representing the behaviours that the test maker wants to measure. The extent to which the items of a test are true representative of the whole content and the objectives of the teaching is called the content validity of the test.
📷
Content validity is estimated by evaluating the relevance of the test items; i.e. the test items must duly cover all the content and behavioural areas of the trait to be measured. It gives idea of subject matter or change in behaviour.
This way, content validity refers to the extent to which a test contains items representing the behaviour that we are going to measure. The items of the test should include every relevant characteristic of the whole content area and objectives in right proportion.
Before constructing the test, the test maker prepares a two-way table of content and objectives, popularly known as “Specification Table”.
Suppose an achievement test in Mathematics is prepared. It must contain items from Algebra, Arithmetic, Geometry, Mensuration and Trigonometry and moreover the items must measure the different behavioural objectives like knowledge, understanding, skill, application etc. So it is imperative that due weightage be given to different content area and objectives.
An example of ‘specification table’ in Mathematics is shown in following table:
📷
The Table reflects the sample of learning tasks to be measured. The closer the test items correspond to the specified sample, the greater the possibility of having satisfactory content validity. Therefore, it is desirable that the items in a test are screened by a team of experts. They should check whether the placement of the various items in the cells of the Table is appropriate and whether all the cells of the Table have an adequate number of items.
The adequacy is to be judged in terms of the weightage given to the different content-by-objective Table according to the team of experts who have designed the curriculum.
Some general points for ensuring content validity are given below:
1. Test should serve the required level of students, neither above nor below their standard.
2. Language should be upto the level of students.
3. Anything which is not in the curriculum should not be included in test items.
4. Each part of the curriculum should be given necessary weightage. More items should be selected from more important parts of the curriculum.
Limitations:
1. The weightage to be given to different parts of content is subjective.
2. It is difficult to construct the perfect objective test.
3. Content validity is not sufficient or adequate for tests of Intelligence, Achievement, Attitude and to some extent tests of Personality.
4. Weightage given on different behaviour change is not objective.
Type # 3. Predictive Validity:
Predictive Validity the extent to which test predicts the future performance of students.
Predictive validity is concerned with the predictive capacity of a test. It indicates the effectiveness of a test in forecasting or predicting future outcomes in a specific area. The test user wishes to forecast an individual’s future performance. Test scores can be used to predict future behaviour or performance and hence called as predictive validity.
In order to find predictive validity, the tester correlates the test scores with testee’s subsequent performance, technically known as “Criterion”. Criterion is an independent, external and direct measure of that which the test is designed to predict or measure. Hence, it is also known as “Criterion related Validity”.
The predictive or empirical validity has been defined by Cureton (1965) as an estimate of the correlation coefficient between the test scores and the true criterion.
An example can clarify the concept better.
Example:
Medical entrance test is constructed and administered to select candidate for admission into M.B.B.S. courses. Basing on the scores made by the candidates on this test we admit the candidates.
After completion of the course they appear at the final M.B.B.S. examination. The scores of final M.B.B.S. examination is the criterion. The scores of entrance test and final examination (criterion) are correlated. High correlation implies high predictive validity.
Similar examples like other recruitment tests or entrance tests in Agriculture, Engineering, Banking, Railway etc. could be cited here which must have high predictive validity.
That is tests used for recruitment, classification and entrance examination must have high predictive validity. This type of validity is sometimes referred to as ‘Empirical validity’ or ‘Statistical validity’ as our evaluation is primarily empirical and statistical.
Limitation:
If we get a suitable criterion-measure with which our test results are to be correlated, we can determine the predictive validity of a test. But it is very difficult to get a good criterion. Moreover, we may not get criterion-measures for all types of psychological tests.
Type # 4. Concurrent Validity:
Concurrent Validity correlating the test scores with another set of criterion scores.
Concurrent validity refers to the extent to which the test scores correspond to already established or accepted performance, known as criterion. To know the validity of a newly constructed test, it is correlated or compared with some available information.
Thus a test is validated against some concurrently available information. The scores obtained from a newly constructed test are correlated with pre-established test performance. Suppose we have prepared a test of intelligence.
We administer it to group of pupils. The Stanford-Binet test is also administered to the same group. Now test scores made on our newly constructed test and test scores made by pupils on the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Test are correlated. If the coefficient of correlation is high, our intelligence test is said to have high concurrent validity.
The dictionary meaning of the term ‘concurrent’ is ‘existing’ or ‘done at the same time’. Thus the term ‘concurrent validity’ is used to indicate the process of validating a new test by correlating its scores with some existing or available source of information (criterion) which might have been obtained shortly before or shortly after the new test is given.
To ascertain the concurrent validity of an achievement test constructed freshly, its scores are correlated with the scores obtained by those same students in their recent first-terminal or terminal examination. Thus a test is validated against some concurrently available information. To get a criterion measure, we are not required to wait for a long time.
The predictive validity differs from concurrent validity in the sense that in former validity we wait for the future to get criterion measure. But in ease of concurrent validity we need not wait for longer gaps.
The term ‘concurrent’ here implies the following characteristics:
1. The two tests—the one whose validity is being examined and the one with proven validity—are supposed to cover the same content area at a given level and the same objective;
2. The population for both the tests remains the same and the two tests are administered in almost similar environments; and
3. The performance data on both the tests are obtainable almost simultaneously.
This type of validity is also known as “External Validity” or “Functional Validity”. Concurrent validity is relevant to tests employed for diagnosis not for prediction of future success.
Type # 5. Construct Validity:
Construct Validity the extent is which the test may be said to measure a theoretical construct or psychological variable.
A construct is mainly psychological. Usually it refers to a trait or mental process. Construct validation is the process of determining the extent to which a particular test measures the psychological constructs that the test maker intends to measure.
It indicates the extent to which a test measures the abstract attributes or qualities which are not operationally defined.
Gronlund and Linn states,” Construct validation maybe defined as the process of determining the extent to which the test performance can be interpreted in terms of one or more psychological construct.”
Ebel and Frisbie describes, “Construct validation is the process of gathering evidence to support the contention that a given test indeed measures the psychological construct that the test makers intended for it to measure.”
ADVERTISEMENTS:
Construct validity is also known as “Psychological Validity” or ‘Trait Validity’ or ‘Logical Validity’. Construct validity means that the test scores are examined in terms of a construct. It studies the construct or psychological attributes that a test measures.
The extent to which the test measures the personality traits or mental processes as defined by the test-maker is known as the construct validity of the test.
While constructing tests on intelligence, attitude, mathematical aptitude, critical thinking, study skills, anxiety, logical reasoning, reading comprehension etc. we have to go for construct validity. Take for example, ‘a test of sincerity’.
Before constructing such types of test the test maker is confronted with the questions:
1. What should be the definition of the term sincerity?
2. What types of behaviour are to be expected from a person who is sincere?
3. What type of behaviour distinguishes between sincerity and insincerity?
Each construct has an underlying theory that can be brought to bear in describing and predicting a pupil’s behaviour.
Gronlund (1981) suggests the following three steps for determining construct validity:
(i) Identify the constructs presumed to account for test performance.
(ii) Derive hypotheses regarding test performance from the theory underlying each construct.
(iii) Verify the hypotheses by logical and empirical means.
It must be noted that construct validity is inferential. It is used primarily when other types of validity are insufficient to indicate the validity of the test. Construct validity is usually involved in such as those of study habits, appreciation, honesty, emotional stability, sympathy etc.
Type # 6. Factorial Validity:
Factorial Validity the extent of correlation of the different factors with the whole test.
Factorial validity is determined by a statistical technique known as factor analysis. It uses methods of explanation of inter-correlations to identify factors (which may be verbalised as abilities) constituting the test.
In other words methods of inter-correlation and other statistical methods are used to estimate factorial validity. The correlation of the test with each factor is calculated to determine the weight contributed by each such factor to the total performance of the test.
This tells us about the factor loadings. This relationship of the different factors with the whole test is called the factorial validity. Guilford (1950) suggested that factorial validity is the clearest description of what a test measures and by all means should be given preference over other types of validity.
i hope it is helpful to you.
best wishes
Hi,Dj Edarl,
Your Q is best answered by SANDEEP SAVITAPRAKSSH SHARMA on the same lines which I was thinking about..
Go-ahead read that fully
Cheers
I presume that you are at the model specification step. This requires that you already have a theoretical model to determine the variables of interest and the relationship among them.
Prospective reviewers will assist you when this step is well explained.
The following work can throw more light in your project. Nsereko, D. N. et al, (2014). Evaluating of psychosocial problems among Afican university
students ......Development and validation of a screening instrument. Psychology Research, 4(2).112-131.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Psychology