Types of validity in Research

(a) Construct validity
Construct validity seeks agreement between a theoretical concept and a specific measuring device or procedure. For example, a researcher inventing a new IQ test might spend a great deal of time attempting to "define" intelligence in order to reach an acceptable level of construct validity.
Construct validity can be broken down into two sub-categories: Convergent validity and discriminate validity. Convergent validity is the actual general agreement among ratings, gathered independently of one another, where measures should be theoretically related. Discriminate validity is the lack of a relationship among measures which theoretically should not be related.
To understand whether a piece of research has construct validity, three steps should be followed. First, the theoretical relationships must be specified. Second, the empirical relationships between the measures of the concepts must be examined. Third, the empirical evidence must be interpreted in terms of how it clarifies the construct validity of the particular measure being tested.
(b) Content validity
Content Validity is based on the extent to which a measurement reflects the specific intended domain of content.
Content validity can be illustrated using the following examples: Researchers aim to study mathematical learning and create a survey to test for mathematical skill. If these researchers only tested for multiplication and then drew conclusions from that survey, their study would not show content validity because it excludes other mathematical functions. Although the establishment of content validity for placement-type exams seems relatively straight-forward, the process becomes more complex as it moves into the more abstract domain of socio-cultural studies. For example, a researcher needing to measure an attitude like self-esteem must decide what constitutes a relevant domain of content for that attitude. For socio-cultural studies, content validity forces the researchers to define the very domains they are attempting to study.

The usual procedure in assessing the content validity of a measure is to use professional or experts in the particular field. The instrument is given to two groups of experts, one group is requested to assess what concept the instrument is trying to measure. The other group is asked to determine whether the set of items or checklist accurately represents the concept under study.

(c) Criterion related validity
Criterion related validity, also referred to as instrumental validity, is used to demonstrate the accuracy of a measure or procedure by comparing it with another measure or procedure which has been demonstrated to be valid. For example, imagine a hands-on driving test has been shown to be an accurate test of driving skills. By comparing the scores on the written driving test with the scores from the hands-on driving test, the written test can be validated by using a criterion related strategy in which the hands-on driving test is compared to the written test.
Types
- Predictive validity – refers to the degree to which obtained data predicts the future behaviour of subjects e.g. B. Com graduates
- Concurrent validity- refers to the degree to which data are able to predict the behaviour of subjects in the present and not in the future e.g. psychiatry

---

Titany answered the question on October 21, 2021 at 13:01