Concurrent validity

Last updated

Concurrent validity is a type of evidence that can be gathered to defend the use of a test for predicting other outcomes. It is a parameter used in sociology, psychology, and other psychometric or behavioral sciences. Concurrent validity is demonstrated when a test correlates well with a measure that has previously been validated. The two measures may be for the same construct, but more often used for different, but presumably related, constructs.

Psychometrics is a field of study concerned with the theory and technique of psychological measurement. As defined by the National Council on Measurement in Education (NCME), psychometrics refers to psychological measurement. Generally, it refers to the field in psychology and education that is devoted to testing, measurement, assessment, and related activities.

Validity is the extent to which a concept, conclusion or measurement is well-founded and likely corresponds accurately to the real world. The word "valid" is derived from the Latin validus, meaning strong. This should not be confused with notions of certainty nor necessity. The validity of a measurement tool is considered to be the degree to which the tool measures what it claims to measure. Validity is based on the strength of a collection of different types of evidence described in greater detail below.

Contents

The two measures in the study are taken at the same time. This is in contrast to predictive validity, where one measure occurs earlier and is meant to predict some later measure. [1] In both cases, the (concurrent) predictive power of the test is analyzed using a simple correlation or linear regression.

In psychometrics, predictive validity is the extent to which a score on a scale or test predicts scores on some criterion measure.

Linear regression statistical approach for modeling the relationship between a scalar dependent variable and one or more explanatory variables

In statistics, linear regression is a linear approach to modelling the relationship between a scalar response and one or more explanatory variables. The case of one explanatory variable is called simple linear regression. For more than one explanatory variable, the process is called multiple linear regression. This term is distinct from multivariate linear regression, where multiple correlated dependent variables are predicted, rather than a single scalar variable.

Alignment with classical conceptions of validity

Concurrent validity and predictive validity are two types of criterion-related validity. The difference between concurrent validity and predictive validity rests solely on the time at which the two measures are administered. Concurrent validity applies to validation studies in which the two measures are administered at approximately the same time. For example, an employment test may be administered to a group of workers and then the test scores can be correlated with the ratings of the workers' supervisors taken on the same day or in the same week. The resulting correlation would be a concurrent validity coefficient. This type of evidence might be used to support the use of the employment test for future selection of employees.

In psychometrics, criterion or concrete validity is the extent to which a measure is related to an outcome. Criterion validity is often divided into concurrent and predictive validity. Concurrent validity refers to a comparison between the measure in question and an outcome assessed at the same time. In Standards for Educational & Psychological Tests, it states, "concurrent validity reflects only the status quo at a particular time." Predictive validity, on the other hand, compares the measure in question with an outcome assessed at a later time. Although concurrent and predictive validity are similar, it is cautioned to keep the terms and findings separated. "Concurrent validity should not be used as a substitute for predictive validity without an appropriate supporting rationale."

Concurrent validity may be used as a practical substitute for predictive validity. In the example above, predictive validity would be the best choice for validating an employment test, because using the employment test on existing employees may not be a strong analog for using the tests for selection. Reduced motivation and restriction of range are just two possible biasing effects for concurrent validity studies. [2] [3]

Motivation is the reason for people's actions, willingness and goals. Motivation is derived from the word motive in the English language which is defined as a need that requires satisfaction. These needs could also be wants or desires that are acquired through influence of culture, society, lifestyle, etc. or generally innate. Motivation is one's direction to behaviour, or what causes a person to want to repeat a behaviour, a set of force that acts behind the motives. An individual's motivation may be inspired by others or events or it may come from within the individual. Motivation has been considered as one of the most important reasons that inspires a person to move forward. Motivation results from the interaction of both conscious and unconscious factors. Mastering motivation to allow sustained and deliberate practice is central to high levels of achievement e.g. in the worlds of elite sport, medicine or music.

Contrasting similar terms

Concurrent validity differs from convergent validity in that it focuses on the power of the focal test to predict outcomes on another test or some outcome variable. Convergent validity refers to the observation of strong correlations between two tests that are assumed to measure the same construct. It is the interpretation of the focal test as a predictor that differentiates this type of evidence from convergent validity, though both methods rely on simple correlations in the statistical analysis.

Convergent validity, a parameter often used in sociology, psychology, and other behavioral sciences, refers to the degree to which two measures of constructs that theoretically should be related, are in fact related. Convergent validity, along with discriminant validity, is a subtype of construct validity. Convergent validity can be established if two similar constructs correspond with one another, while discriminant validity applies to two dissimilar constructs that are easily differentiated.

See also

Related Research Articles

Myers–Briggs Type Indicator Model of personality types

The Myers–Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) is an introspective self-report questionnaire with the purpose of indicating differing psychological preferences in how people perceive the world around them and make decisions.

Emotional intelligence (EI), emotional leadership (EL), emotional quotient (EQ) and emotional intelligence quotient (EIQ), is the capability of individuals to recognize their own emotions and those of others, discern between different feelings and label them appropriately, use emotional information to guide thinking and behavior, and manage and/or adjust emotions to adapt to environments or achieve one's goal(s).

Reliability in statistics and psychometrics is the overall consistency of a measure. A measure is said to have a high reliability if it produces similar results under consistent conditions. "It is the characteristic of a set of test scores that relates to the amount of random error from the measurement process that might be embedded in the scores. Scores that are highly reliable are accurate, reproducible, and consistent from one testing occasion to another. That is, if the testing process were repeated with a group of test takers, essentially the same results would be obtained. Various kinds of reliability coefficients, with values ranging between 0.00 and 1.00, are usually used to indicate the amount of error in the scores." For example, measurements of people's height and weight are often extremely reliable.

Quantitative marketing research is the application of quantitative research techniques to the field of marketing. It has roots in both the positivist view of the world, and the modern marketing viewpoint that marketing is an interactive process in which both the buyer and seller reach a satisfying agreement on the "four Ps" of marketing: Product, Price, Place (location) and Promotion.

The g factor is a construct developed in psychometric investigations of cognitive abilities and human intelligence. It is a variable that summarizes positive correlations among different cognitive tasks, reflecting the fact that an individual's performance on one type of cognitive task tends to be comparable to that person's performance on other kinds of cognitive tasks. The g factor typically accounts for 40 to 50 percent of the between-individual performance differences on a given cognitive test, and composite scores based on many tests are frequently regarded as estimates of individuals' standing on the g factor. The terms IQ, general intelligence, general cognitive ability, general mental ability, or simply intelligence are often used interchangeably to refer to this common core shared by cognitive tests. The g factor targets a particular measure of general intelligence.

Construct validity is "the degree to which a test measures what it claims, or purports, to be measuring." In the classical model of test validity, construct validity is one of three main types of validity evidence, alongside content validity and criterion validity. Modern validity theory defines construct validity as the overarching concern of validity research, subsuming all other types of validity evidence.

Personnel selection is the methodical process used to hire individuals. Although the term can apply to all aspects of the process the most common meaning focuses on the selection of workers. In this respect, selected prospects are separated from rejected applicants with the intention of choosing the person who will be the most successful and make the most valuable contributions to the organization. Its effect on the group is discerned when the selected accomplish their desired impact to the group, through achievement or tenure. The procedure of selection takes after strategy to gather data around a person so as to figure out whether that individual ought to be utilized. The strategies used must be in compliance with the various laws in respect to work force selection.

In psychology, discriminant validity or divergent validity tests whether concepts or measurements that are not supposed to be related are actually unrelated.

The connectedness to nature scale (CNS) is a measure of individuals' trait levels of feeling emotionally connected to the natural world in the realm of social and environmental psychology. The CNS was “designed to tap an individual’s affective, experiential connection to nature.” The concept of connectedness to nature signifies the relationship between an individual and the environment. In brief, the scale intends to measure the level to which an individual feels connected with the natural world. Mayer and Frantz describe the CNS as a reliable, single-factored, multi-item scale that is easy to administer.

Statistical conclusion validity is the degree to which conclusions about the relationship among variables based on the data are correct or "reasonable". This began as being solely about whether the statistical conclusion about the relationship of the variables was correct, but now there is a movement towards moving to "reasonable" conclusions that use: quantitative, statistical, and qualitative data. Fundamentally, two types of errors can occur: type I and type II. Statistical conclusion validity concerns the qualities of the study that make these types of errors more likely. Statistical conclusion validity involves ensuring the use of adequate sampling procedures, appropriate statistical tests, and reliable measurement procedures.

Employment testing is the practice of administering written, oral, or other tests as a means of determining the suitability or desirability of a job applicant. The premise is that if scores on a test correlate with job performance, then it is economically useful for the employer to select employees based on scores from that test.

The multitrait-multimethod (MTMM) matrix is an approach to examining construct validity developed by Campbell and Fiske (1959). It organizes convergent and discriminant validity evidence for comparison of how a measure relates to other measures.

Test validity is the extent to which a test accurately measures what it is supposed to measure. In the fields of psychological testing and educational testing, "validity refers to the degree to which evidence and theory support the interpretations of test scores entailed by proposed uses of tests". Although classical models divided the concept into various "validities", the currently dominant view is that validity is a single unitary construct.

The Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI) was developed in 1979 by Raskin and Hall, and since then, has become one of the most widely utilized personality measures for non-clinical levels of the trait narcissism. Since its initial development, the NPI has evolved from 220 items to the more commonly employed NPI-40 (1984) and NPI-16 (2006), as well as the novel NPI-1 inventory (2014). Derived from the DSM-III criteria for Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD), the NPI has been employed heavily by personality and social psychology researchers.

Incremental validity is a type of validity that is used to determine whether a new psychometric assessment will increase the predictive ability beyond that provided by an existing method of assessment. In other words, incremental validity seeks to answer if the new test adds much information that might be obtained with simpler, already existing methods.

References

  1. ↑ McIntire, S.A. and Miller, L.A., Foundations of Psychological Testing,2nd Edition, Sage Publishing Co., 2005.
  2. ↑ Sackett, P.R.; Lievens, F.; Berry, C.M.; Landers, R.N. (2007). "A Cautionary Note on the Effects of Range Restriction on Predictor Intercorrelations" (PDF). Journal of Applied Psychology. 92 (2): 538–544. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.92.2.538. PMID   17371098.
  3. ↑ Lane, D.M., Restriction of Range


This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.