Measurement Theory in Action Case Studies and Exercises 2nd Shultz Solution Manual

Measurement Theory in Action Case Studies and

Exercises 2nd Shultz Solution Manual

To download the complete and accurate content document, go to:

https://testbankbell.com/download/measurement-theory-in-action-case-studies-and-e
xercises-2nd-shultz-solution-manual/

Visit TestBankBell.com to get complete for all chapters

 Suggested Answers to Module Exercise Questions 1

NOTE: Original exercises and their questions are in italics, while the suggested answers are in bold
face type.

Module 7: Content Validity

EXERCISE 7.1: IDENTIFYING SMES

OBJECTIVE: To gain practice identifying appropriate samples to provide content validation

ratings.

For each of the following tests, identify two different samples of people who would have the
expertise to serve as subject matter experts (SMEs) for providing judgments regarding the content
validity of the test.
1. A knowledge test of local residential electrical codes
2. A measure of political predisposition along the liberalism/conservatism continuum
3. A midterm exam for a high school algebra course
4. A structured interview used to select salespersons
5. A survey of the electorate’s preferences for major political office in the upcoming election

Responses should identify experts relevant to the test.

Example:
A knowledge test of local residential electrical codes – county building code inspectors,
managers of a home construction company.

EXERCISE 7.2: ENSURING REPRESENTATIVE ASSESSMENT OF TEST DIMENSIONS

OBJECTIVE: To consider the relative importance of various dimensions of a test.

Given the limited number of items that can be included on a test or inventory, test developers must
often make difficult decisions regarding the proportion of items that can be used to assess each
dimension of a construct. For each of the following multidimensional tests, determine the proportion
of items you would choose to assess each of the specified dimensions. For each test, ensure the total
proportion of items sums to 100% across dimensions. Justify your determination for each test.

1. A knowledge test of local residential electrical codes assesses knowledge of (a) municipal, (b)
county, and (c) state electrical codes.
2. A midterm exam for a high school algebra course assesses each of the following topics:
a. Working with variables
b. Solving equations
c. Solving word problems
d. Polynomial operations
e. Factoring polynomials
f. Quadratic equations

Created by Kenneth S. Shultz, David J. Whitney, and Michael J. Zickar to accompany Shultz,
Whitney, & Zickar: Measurement Theory in Action, 2nd ed © 2014 Routledge/Taylor & Francis
 Suggested Answers to Module Exercise Questions 2

g. Graphing linear equations

h. Inequalities
3. A structured interview used to select salespersons is intended to assess each of the following
characteristics of the applicant:
a. Ability to communicate verbally
b. Planning and organization
c. Persuasiveness
d. Anxiety in social situations
4. A measure of religiosity is composed of the following dimensions:
a. Religious beliefs
b. Religious practices
c. Religious knowledge
d. Religious feelings (mystical experiences, sense of well being, etc.)
e. Religious effects on personal behaviors

Example:

For a knowledge test of local residential codes, one could assign approximately 33% of
the items to assessing municipal, county, and state electrical codes since knowledge of
each of these governmental levels’ codes would be essential for an electrician.
Alternatively, one could argue that some greater proportion of items should assess
municipal and county codes, if the concern is that most competent electricians may be
familiar with state electrical codes, but may be less aware of important municipal or
county codes.

EXERCISE 7.3: DETERMINING THE CVI OF A MEASURE OF UNDERGRADUATE ACADEMIC WORK ETHIC

OBJECTIVE: To gain experience obtaining and computing content validity ratings.

Instructions:
Below you will find a description of a measure intended to assess the construct Undergraduate
Academic Work Ethic. Following this brief description are the items initially written to compose
the scale.
For this exercise, choose an appropriate sample of at least 10 individuals to act as SMEs for
this scale. Ask these SMEs to familiarize themselves with the proposed dimensions of the scale.
Then ask each SME to rate each item on the scale as “essential,” “useful,” or “not necessary.”
Remind the SMEs that negatively worded items can be just as useful in assessing the construct as
positively worded items. Finally, provide a response for each of the following:

1. Compute the CVR for each item on the scale.

2. Compute the CVI for the entire set of 20 items that comprise the initial scale.
3. Based on statistical significance, Lawshe (1975) recommended that with 10 raters, the CVR
should be at least .62 to retain an item. Which items would be deleted using this criterion?
4. If the items identified in the preceding item were deleted, what would be the CVI of the
remaining items?

Created by Kenneth S. Shultz, David J. Whitney, and Michael J. Zickar to accompany Shultz,
Whitney, & Zickar: Measurement Theory in Action, 2nd ed © 2014 Routledge/Taylor & Francis
Measurement Theory in Action Case Studies and Exercises 2nd Shultz Solution Manual

Suggested Answers to Module Exercise Questions 3

The Undergraduate Academic Work Ethic Measure

The Undergraduate Academic Work Ethic scale is a 20-item measure of the academic work
ethic of undergraduate college students. Undergraduate academic work ethic is defined as an
undergraduate student’s academic work habits, including:
a. class-related attendance and participation
b. study habits
c. procrastination tendencies
d. dedication to school-work
e. academic honesty

Respondents are asked to indicate the degree to which they agree with each item using a five-
point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly Agree).

1. I make an effort to come to every class, even when I don’t feel like attending.
2. I am NOT overly concerned with being in class at the beginning of the lecture.
3. I enjoy participating in class discussions.
4. I would go to my professor’s office hours if I needed help in the class.
5. When working in a group, I rarely attend all the group meetings.
6. When writing a paper, I usually wait until the last minute to start it.
7. I usually do NOT procrastinate when it comes to my homework.
8. I have a tendency to cram for tests.
9. I do the least amount of work required in order to pass.
10. I consider myself to have good time management skills when it comes to my schoolwork.
11. I rarely take advantage of extra-credit opportunities.
12. I would turn down an appealing offer to go out if I had to study.
13. During finals week, I rarely have any free time because I am so busy studying.
14. If I don’t understand something in class, I will ask the professor or a classmate to explain it.
15. It would NOT bother me to receive a poor grade in a course.
16. I try to be one of the top-ranked students in the class.
17. Doing well in school is NOT a priority in my life.
18. I set high academic goals for myself.
19. I would cheat on a test if I knew I could get away with it.
20. I would allow a classmate to copy my homework.

In performing Exercise 7.3, it is essential that students fully educate raters on (a) the task they
are to perform (i.e., serve as expert raters, not complete the items), (b) the definition and
dimensions of the construct “Undergraduate Academic Work Ethic,” and (c) the proper use of
the CVR rating scale. Once data has been obtained from the minimum sample of 10 raters,
students may proceed to answering the four questions in the exercise.

Created by Kenneth S. Shultz, David J. Whitney, and Michael J. Zickar to accompany Shultz,
Whitney, & Zickar: Measurement Theory in Action, 2nd ed © 2014 Routledge/Taylor & Francis
Visit TestBankBell.com to get complete for all chapters