The point:
"This researcher has done lot of calculations to test the reliability construct (Cronbach Alpha and Composite reliability) and the validity construct (Convergent and the discriminate) but, failed to highlight under the methodology, about the types of evidence ( evidence based on content, evidence based on internal structure, evidence based on response processes, evidence based on relationships to other variables and evidence based on consequence of testing) to justify the validity exist according to the Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing-2014 in addition, the researcher also failed to mention about the ways/ criteria that have been used to measure and justify existence of the reasonable level of the reliability of the data collection instrument like questionnaires."
(1) Reviewers' questions must be answered point by point with an appreciation for the points raised.
(2) If some points are not covered under the study they must be mentioned and it should be added as a limitation of the study.
(3) Some comments may not be appropriate or have already been answered that are to be mentioned very politely. If needed that to spelt out at that point where it has been mentioned to remove the unclearness of the readers.
First of all, the reviewer is obsessive because the information you provided is typically considered adequate. Second, the origin of the reviewer's obsession seems to be something called the "Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing-2014." So, look up that source, and see what it actually says.
Hello Md. H Asibur Rahman,
To me, the reviewer is asking that you put a brief statement in your method section (perhaps two sentences, tops) describing what you did to estimate score reliability and score validity. That should be very simple, given what you apparently have done. Yes, this sounds a bit obsessive (and pedantic), so I concur with David Morgan's assessment of the reviewer's request.
However, I would like to make mention of The Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing (2014 edition). This is a joint publication, updated with representatives from the American Educational Research Association, the National Council on Measurement in Education, and the American Psychological Association. It is a very useful and quite readable document for outlining the rights, responsibilities and expectations of test developers, publishers, test users, and test takers. The document is periodically updated, and was initially published in 1966, so it really should be considered a part of the landscape whenever measurement is involved.
For those interested in the Joint Standards, use this link for open access version: https://www.testingstandards.net/
Good luck with your work.
Thanks for the link, David Morse . I look forward to looking at this publication.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Psychology