Labayandoy, Chariss P.

BSED- Eng. 4-1

RELIABILITY refers to whether or not you get the same answer by using an instrument to
measure something more than once. In simple terms, research reliability is the degree to which
research method produces stable and consistent results.

A specific measure is considered to be reliable if its application on the same object of

measurement number of times produces the same results.

Types:

Test-retest reliability- is the extent to which this is actually the case. For example, intelligence is
generally thought to be consistent across time. A person who is highly intelligent today will be
highly intelligent next week.

Assessing test-retest reliability requires using the measure on a group of people at one time,
using it again on the same group of people at a later time, and then looking at test-retest
correlation between the two sets of scores.

Internal Consistency- which is the consistency of people’s responses across the items on a
multiple-item measure. In general, all the items on such measures are supposed to reflect the
same underlying construct, so people’s scores on those items should be correlated with each
other. can only be assessed by collecting and analyzing data. One approach is to look at a split-
half correlation. This involves splitting the items into two sets, such as the first and second
halves of the items or the even- and odd-numbered items. Then a score is computed for each
set of items, and the relationship between the two sets of scores is examined.

Interrater Reliability- Many behavioural measures involve significant judgment on the part of an
observer or a rater. Inter-rater reliability is the extent to which different observers are consistent
in their judgments.

Internal and External reliability. Internal reliability assesses the consistency of results across
items within a test. External reliability refers to the extent to which a measure varies from one
use to another.

Parallel-Forms Reliability- Used to assess the consistency of the results of two tests constructed
in the same way from the same content domain.
 VALIDITY is an indication of how sound your research is. More specifically, validity applies to
both the design and the methods of your research. Validity in data collection means that your
findings truly represent the phenomenon you are claiming to measure. Valid claims are solid
claims. Validity is one of the main concerns with research. "Any research can be affected by
different kinds of factors which, while extraneous to the concerns of the research, can invalidate
the findings" (Seliger & Shohamy 1989, 95). Controlling all possible factors that threaten the
research's validity is a primary responsibility of every good researcher.

Types:

Face validity- is the extent to which a measurement method appears “on its face” to measure
the construct of interest. Face validity is at best a very weak kind of evidence that a
measurement method is measuring what it is supposed to. One reason is that it is based on
people’s intuitions about human behaviour, which are frequently wrong. It is also the case that
many established measures in psychology work quite well despite lacking face validity.

Content validity- is the extent to which a measure “covers” the construct of interest. For
example, if a researcher conceptually defines test anxiety as involving both sympathetic nervous
system activation (leading to nervous feelings) and negative thoughts, then his measure of test
anxiety should include items about both nervous feelings and negative thoughts. Or consider
that attitudes are usually defined as involving thoughts, feelings, and actions toward something.
Criterion validity -is the extent to which people’s scores on a measure are correlated with other
variables (known as criteria) that one would expect them to be correlated with. A criterion can
be any variable that one has reason to think should be correlated with the construct being
measured, and there will usually be many of them.

Discriminant validity- is the extent to which scores on a measure are not correlated with
measures of variables that are conceptually distinct.

Construct Validity -relates to assessment of suitability of measurement tool to measure the

phenomenon being studied. Application of construct validity can be effectively facilitated with
the involvement of panel of ‘experts’ closely familiar with the measure and the phenomenon.

Formative Validity -refers to assessment of effectiveness of the measure in terms of providing

information that can be used to improve specific aspects of the phenomenon.

Sampling Validity -(similar to content validity) ensures that the area of coverage of the measure
within the research area is vast. No measure is able to cover all items and elements within the
phenomenon, therefore, important items and elements are selected using a specific pattern of
sampling method depending on aims and objectives of the study.