Scribd
Upload
4 views

Class quiz 4

The document discusses the concepts of reliability and validity in research, explaining their importance in measuring consistency and accuracy. It outlines various types of reliability, including test-retest, split-half, parallel forms, internal consistency, and interitem consistency, as well as types of validity such as construct, content, face, and criterion validity. Each type is illustrated with examples to clarify their application in research methodologies.

Uploaded by

Moeez Mohal
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
4 views

Class quiz 4

The document discusses the concepts of reliability and validity in research, explaining their importance in measuring consistency and accuracy. It outlines various types of reliability, including test-retest, split-half, parallel forms, internal consistency, and interitem consistency, as well as types of validity such as construct, content, face, and criterion validity. Each type is illustrated with examples to clarify their application in research methodologies.

Uploaded by

Moeez Mohal
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 6

Research Tools and

Techniques

IBRAHIM RIAZ
FA18-BBA-052
BBA 5B
CLASS QUIZ 4
SUBMTTED TO: TAMANIA KHAN

24 December, 2020
QUESTION
Explain the concept of reliability and validity. Explain
the types of reliability and validity.

ANSWER

RELIABILITY:
The reliability indicates the stability and consistency with which the
instrument measures the concept. It is about how normally a technique
measures anything with the same results attained again and again under
the same techniques and conditions, then the measurement is said to be
reliable.
For example, if a person measures the temperature under the same
situation again and again. The thermometer shows the same reading. So
the results are reliable.

TYPES
Test-retest:
It is a repetition of the same measure for the second time. It measures
the uniformity of results when the same test of the same sample at a
different point in time is repeated. It is used to evaluate how effectively
a method endures these factors over time. Smaller the difference
between the result of the two sets, the higher the test-retest reliability.
It is the steadiness of measure across time.
Example:
Give the same test to the employee on Friday then again the following
Friday to see if the scores are the same. The two scores are then
correlated.

Split-half reliability:
Split-half reliability reflects the correlations between two halves of an
instrument. The estimates will vary depending on how the items in the
measure are split into two halves.
Example:
1. Split a test into two halves. For example, one half may be
composed of even-numbered questions while the other half is
composed of odd-numbered questions.
2. Administer each half to the same individual.
3. Repeat for a large group of individuals.
4. Find the correlation between the scores for both halves.
The higher the correlation between the two halves, the higher the
internal consistency of the test or survey. Ideally, you would like the
correlation between the halves to be high because this indicates that all
parts of the test are contributing equally to what is being measured.

Parallel forms Reliability:


When responses on two comparable sets of measures tapping the same
construct are highly correlated, we have parallel-form reliability. It is
related to the measurement of association between two identical
categories of tests. By manufacturing a large set of questions to weigh
the same thing and then divide it into two question sets we can measure
the reliability of the parallel forms. The same group of participants
answers both sets and then the correlation between them will be
calculated. Higher the correlation means higher the reliability of the
parallel forms.
Example:
Both classes (BBA and BAF) take both tests. BBA takes test A first, and
BAF takes test B first. The results of the two tests are compared, and the
results are almost identical, indicating high parallel forms reliability.

Internal consistency:
It evaluates the correlation between multiple items in a test that are
attempted to calculate the same form. It is a steadiness of measurement
itself. Without repeating the test it can be calculated. Two methods are
used to measure internal consistency.
Example:
Design a questionnaire to measure Motivation. Randomly split the
results into two halves, there should be a strong correlation between
the two sets of results. If the two results are very different, this indicates
low internal consistency.

Interitem consistency reliability:


The interitem consistency reliability is a test of the consistency of
respondents’ answers to all the items in a measure. To the degree that
items are independent measures of the same concept, they will be
correlated with one another.
Example:
Personality questionnaires often consist of multiple items that tell you
something about the extraversion or confidence of participants.

VALIDITY:
It is about how precisely a method computes what is planned to
measure. High validity of research means it will give results that
correlate to real properties, characteristics, and variations and it also
means a valid measurement.

TYPES
Construct Validity:
It shows how well the results obtained from the use of the measure fit
the theories around which the test is designed. It estimates whether a
measurement tool really signifies the thing which is measuring. It is
about to guarantee that the method of measurement matches the
manufacture wanted to be measure. It is achieved by ensuring that
indicators and measurements develop based on appropriate existing
knowledge.
Example:
Evaluation of the human brain such as intelligence, level of emotions,
skills or abilities

Content validity:
It will evaluate that whether a test is representative of all features of the
invention. For the production of rational results, the content of a test,
view, or measurement technique must cover all linked parts of the
subjects which aiming to measure.
Example:
If a test is designed to survey Computer skills at a fifth-grade level,
content validity indicates how well it represents the range of Computer
operations possible at that level.

Face Validity:
It is all about how appropriate the content of a test appears to be on the
surface. It is more likely to content validity but face validity is more
informal. It is subjective and the weakest kind of validity. It is useful in
the beginning stages of developing a method.
Example:
A mathematical test consisting of problems in which the test taker has
to add and subtract numbers may be considered to have strong face
validity. The test items appear, at face value, to measure what one is
seeking to measure.

Criterion validity:
It measures how closely the result of one test is related to a different
test. To measure the criterion validity, the correlation will be calculated
between the results of measurements and the result of the basic
measurement. High correlation means the test is measuring what is
desired. It is also called concrete validity. It has two types concurrent
validity and predictive validity.
Example:
A Sportsman takes a performance test during the practice. If this test
accurately predicts how well the Sportsman will perform on the field,
the test is said to have criterion validity.

You might also like