RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY Flashcards

1
Q

Define reliability

A

the consistency or repeatability of your measurement

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

what are the three types of reliability

A

stability of the measure (test-retest)

internal consistency of the measure (split-half, cronbach;s alpha)

Agreement or consistency across raters (inter-rater reliability

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

what does test-retest reliability look at?

A

whether your test measures the the same thing every time you use it

same Q. given on two occasions and data correlate

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

test-retest - how do you address the stability of the measure?

A
  • you administer the measure at one point in time (test)
  • you then give the same measure to the same participant at a later point in time (retest)
  • correlate the scores on the two measures
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

what are the two main problems with test-retest

A

Memory Effect -
participants may remember the experiment > will improve their second measure
- to short time between = greater risk of memory effects

Practice effect-
performance improve because of practice in test taking
- too long time between = risk of other variables (additional learning)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

what does split half reliability look at?

A

whether your measure is internally consistent

Split Q in half and correlate data from two halves

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

split half reliability - how do you test whether your measure is internally consistent?

A
  • administer a single measure at one time to a group of participants
  • split the measure into two halves and correlate the scores
  • higher correlation means greater reliability

e.g. 20 item, score one half (10 items) and second half (10 items), test correlation between the two halves

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

pros and cons of split- half reliability

A

PRO
eliminates memory/practice effects

CON
are the two halves really equivalent

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

two methods of assessing internal consistency

A

split-half method

cronbach’s alpha

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

what does cronbach’s alpha assess

A

internal consistency of your measure

tells you how well the items or questions in your measure appear to reflect the same underlying construct

good internal consistency = when individuals respond the same way

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

how is cronbach’s alpha measured

A

mathematically equivalent to average of all possible split-half reliabilities

coefficient alpha can range from 0-1 >closer to 1 = better reliability

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

what does inter-rater reliability look at?

A

whether different raters measure the same thing

checking the match between two or more raters or judges

e.g. coding videos for infants “looking time” - need to check agreement amongst the coders

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

how is inter-rater reliability calculated

A

nominal/ordinal scale
- the percentage of times different raters agree

interval or ratio scale
- correlation coefficient

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

define Validity

A

the credibility of the measure

are we measuring what we think we are?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

why is validity an issue

A

many variables in social research cannot be directly observes

  • motivation, satisfaction, helplessness
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

types of validity

A

face validity

content validity

criterion validity (concurrent, predictive)

construct validity (convergent, discriminant/divergent)

17
Q

what is face validity

A

items appear to relate to construct

a weak, subjective method for assessing validity

a good first step to validity assessment

18
Q

what is content validity

A

the extent to which the measure is representative of a sampling of relevant dimensions

does it cover all aspects of the construct that its meant to measure

how much does the measure cover the content of the definition?

19
Q

what is criterion-related validity

A

checking the performance of your measure agains an external criterion

agree with external sources

20
Q

what are the two types of criterion-related validity

A

concurrent

predictive

21
Q

define concurrent criterion validity

A

a means in establishing validity of your measurement by comparing to a gold standard
>i.e. existing validated measure of the same construct

agrees with pre-existing “gold standard” measure

22
Q

what is predictive criterion validity

A

assessing the validity of your measure against what you theoretically predict to happen

agrees with future behaviour

23
Q

define construct validity

A

how well the measure and other constructs relate to each other (consistent with a theory)

24
Q

what are the two types of construct validity

A

convergent

divergent

25
Q

define divergent construct validity

A

assessing validity by comparing measures of construct that theoretically should not be related to each other and are observed to not relate to each other

> theoretically should not and in fact are not related <

i.e. you should be able to discriminate/diverge between dissimilar constructs

26
Q

define convergent construct validity

A

assessing validity by comparing measures of constructs that theoretically should be related that are observed to relate to each other

> theoretically should and in fact are related <

i.e. there is correspondence or convergence between similar constructs