1. Construct Validity By Michael Kotutwa Johnson Submitted October 23, 2006 AED 615 Professor Franklin

2. Overview Definitions of Construct Validity Types of Construct Validity How Construct Validity is Used in Research Where to Find an Example of Construct Validity References

3. Definition of Construct Validity “Construct validity refers to the degree to which inferences can legitimately be made from the operationalizations in your study to the theoretical constructs on which those opernationalizations were based…….construct validity involves generalizing from your program or measures to the concept of your program or measures. You might think of construct validity as a ‘labeling’ issue.” Source: Construct Validity (http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/constval.htm)

4. Another Definition of Construct Validity “ Construct validity is indeed the unifying concept of validity that integrates criterion and content considerations into a common framework for testing rational hypothesis about theoretically relevant relationships. This construct meaning provides a rational basis both for hypothesizing predictive relationships and for judging content relevance and representiveness.” Messick, 1980

5. Overview Definitions of Construct Validity Definitions of Construct Validity Types of Construct Validity Types of Construct Validity How Construct Validity is Used in Research How Construct Validity is Used in Research Where to Find an Example of Construct Validity Where to Find an Example of Construct Validity References References

6. Types of Construct Validity Translation Validity Translation Validity Face Validity Face Validity Content Validity Content Validity Criterion-Related Validity Criterion-Related Validity Predictive Validity Predictive Validity Concurrent Validity Concurrent Validity Convergent Validity Convergent Validity

7. Translation Validity Face Validity- If you look at the operationalization and see whether on its face seems like a good translation of the construct. Face Validity- If you look at the operationalization and see whether on its face seems like a good translation of the construct. Content Validity- Checking the operationalization against the relevant content domain for the construct. Content Validity- Checking the operationalization against the relevant content domain for the construct.

8. Criterion-Related Validity Predictive Validity- Assessment of the operationalization’s ability to predict something it should theoretically be able to predict. Predictive Validity- Assessment of the operationalization’s ability to predict something it should theoretically be able to predict. Concurrent Validity-Assessment of the operationalization’s ability to distinguish between groups that it should theoretically be able to distinguish between. Concurrent Validity-Assessment of the operationalization’s ability to distinguish between groups that it should theoretically be able to distinguish between. Convergent Validity- The degree to which the operationalization is similar to (converges on) other operationalizations that it theoretically should be similar to. Convergent Validity- The degree to which the operationalization is similar to (converges on) other operationalizations that it theoretically should be similar to.

9. Overview Definitions of Construct Validity Definitions of Construct Validity Types of Construct Validity Types of Construct Validity How Construct Validity is Used in Research How Construct Validity is Used in Research Where to Find and Example of Construct Validity Where to Find and Example of Construct Validity References References

10. How Construct Validity is Used in Research Three Step Process Three Step Process 1. The variable being measured is clearly defined; 2. Hypotheses, based on theory underlying the variable, are formed about how people who possess a lot versus a little of the variable will behave in a particular situation; 3. The hypothesis are tested both logically and empirically.

11. For Example…….. Suppose a researcher interested in developing a pencil-and-paper test to measure honesty wants to use a construct-validity approach. Suppose a researcher interested in developing a pencil-and-paper test to measure honesty wants to use a construct-validity approach. Then What….

12. ……Application of Construct- Validity Three Step Process. He/She first defines “honesty.” He/She first defines “honesty.” Next they formulate a theory about how “honest” people behave as compared to “dishonest” people. Next they formulate a theory about how “honest” people behave as compared to “dishonest” people. Based on the theory, the researcher might hypothesize that individuals who score high on their honesty test will be more likely to attempt to locate the owner of an object they find than individuals who score low on the test. Based on the theory, the researcher might hypothesize that individuals who score high on their honesty test will be more likely to attempt to locate the owner of an object they find than individuals who score low on the test. The researcher then administers the honesty test, separates the names of those who score high and those who score low, and gives all of them an opportunity to be honest. The researcher then administers the honesty test, separates the names of those who score high and those who score low, and gives all of them an opportunity to be honest.

13. Application process cont…. If the researchers hypotheses is substantiated, more of the high scorers than the low scorers on the honesty test will attempt to call the owner of the wallet. If the researchers hypotheses is substantiated, more of the high scorers than the low scorers on the honesty test will attempt to call the owner of the wallet. With this piece of evidence it can be construed that their inferences may be substantiated about the honesty of individuals, based on the scores they receive on the test. With this piece of evidence it can be construed that their inferences may be substantiated about the honesty of individuals, based on the scores they receive on the test. Furthermore, it is a broad array of evidence, rather than any one particular type of evidence, that is desired when using construct-validity. Furthermore, it is a broad array of evidence, rather than any one particular type of evidence, that is desired when using construct-validity.

14. Overview Definitions of Construct Validity Definitions of Construct Validity Types of Construct Validity Types of Construct Validity How Construct Validity is Used in Research How Construct Validity is Used in Research Where to Find and Example of Construct Validity Where to Find and Example of Construct Validity References References

15. Where to Find an Example of Construct Validity Dyer, J. & Osborne, E. (1996). Effects of teaching approach on problem solving ability of agricultural education students with varying learning styles. Journal of Agriculture Education, 37(4), 38-44. http://pubs.aged.tamu.edu/jae/pdf/vol37/37-04-36.pdf

16. References Fraenkal J.R. & Wallen N.E. (2006). How to design and evaluate research and education. New York: McGraw Hill. Fraenkal J.R. & Wallen N.E. (2006). How to design and evaluate research and education. New York: McGraw Hill. Conrad, J. (Ed.). (1994). Reassessing validity threats in experiments: Focus on construct validity. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Conrad, J. (Ed.). (1994). Reassessing validity threats in experiments: Focus on construct validity. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Pearlman, K. (1983). Validity generalization applied to the construct validity of a broad-band examination. Washington D.C.: U.S. Office of Personnel Management. Pearlman, K. (1983). Validity generalization applied to the construct validity of a broad-band examination. Washington D.C.: U.S. Office of Personnel Management. Messick, S. (1980). The standard problem: Meaning and values in measurement and evaluation. Psychologist, 35. 1012-1027. Messick, S. (1980). The standard problem: Meaning and values in measurement and evaluation. Psychologist, 35. 1012-1027. Dyer, J. & Osborne, E. (1996). Effects of teaching approach on problem solving ability of agricultural education students with varying learning styles. Journal of Agriculture Education, 37(4), 38-44. Dyer, J. & Osborne, E. (1996). Effects of teaching approach on problem solving ability of agricultural education students with varying learning styles. Journal of Agriculture Education, 37(4), 38-44. Construct Validity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Construct_validity) Construct Validity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Construct_validity)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Construct_validity Construct Validity (http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/constval.htm) Construct Validity (http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/constval.htm)http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/constval.htm