Content validity: Difference between revisions
From CEOpedia | Management online
m (Infobox update) |
m (Infobox5 upgrade) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
'''Content validity''' refers to the extent to which a test measures what it is intended to measure. It is a measure of the extent to which a test covers all important aspects of a construct or domain. In other words, it assesses whether the test items are representative of the entire universe of content that the test is supposed to measure. To establish content validity, test developers typically gather a panel of experts to review and evaluate the test items and make sure that they are appropriate and relevant to the construct or domain being measured. | '''Content validity''' refers to the extent to which a test measures what it is intended to measure. It is a measure of the extent to which a test covers all important aspects of a construct or domain. In other words, it assesses whether the test items are representative of the entire universe of content that the test is supposed to measure. To establish content validity, test developers typically gather a panel of experts to review and evaluate the test items and make sure that they are appropriate and relevant to the construct or domain being measured. | ||
| Line 24: | Line 10: | ||
In all these examples, the test is considered to have good content validity if it covers all the important aspects of the construct or domain being measured, and if the test items are relevant and appropriate to the population being tested. | In all these examples, the test is considered to have good content validity if it covers all the important aspects of the construct or domain being measured, and if the test items are relevant and appropriate to the population being tested. | ||
{{infobox5|list1={{i5link|a=[[Skill test]]}} — {{i5link|a=[[Work sample test]]}} — {{i5link|a=[[Test validity]]}} — {{i5link|a=[[MBS Method]]}} — {{i5link|a=[[Career assessment]]}} — {{i5link|a=[[Basic research]]}} — {{i5link|a=[[Evaluation criteria]]}} — {{i5link|a=[[Performance appraisal systems]]}} — {{i5link|a=[[Bidding documents]]}} }} | |||
==References== | ==References== | ||
Latest revision as of 16:37, 17 November 2023
Content validity refers to the extent to which a test measures what it is intended to measure. It is a measure of the extent to which a test covers all important aspects of a construct or domain. In other words, it assesses whether the test items are representative of the entire universe of content that the test is supposed to measure. To establish content validity, test developers typically gather a panel of experts to review and evaluate the test items and make sure that they are appropriate and relevant to the construct or domain being measured.
Examples of content validity
Examples of content validity include:
- A math test that includes a variety of question types (e.g. multiple choice, short answer, word problems) that assess different mathematical concepts and skills.
- A reading comprehension test that includes passages from a variety of genres (e.g. fiction, nonfiction, poetry) and that assess different reading skills (e.g. main idea, inference, vocabulary).
- A driving test that includes a variety of driving scenarios (e.g. city driving, highway driving, night driving) and that assesses different driving skills (e.g. braking, turning, parallel parking).
- A job interview that assesses the skills and qualifications that are necessary for the job.
- A psychological test that assesses the various aspects of a specific disorder or construct, for example, a depression test would assess all the diagnostic criteria of depression.
In all these examples, the test is considered to have good content validity if it covers all the important aspects of the construct or domain being measured, and if the test items are relevant and appropriate to the population being tested.
| Content validity — recommended articles |
| Skill test — Work sample test — Test validity — MBS Method — Career assessment — Basic research — Evaluation criteria — Performance appraisal systems — Bidding documents |
References
- Beckstead, J. W. (2009). Content validity is naught. International journal of nursing studies, 46(9), 1274-1283.
- Sireci, S. G. (1998). The construct of content validity. Social indicators research, 45(1), 83-117.
- Zamanzadeh, V., Rassouli, M., Abbaszadeh, A., Majd, H. A., Nikanfar, A., & Ghahramanian, A. (2014). Details of content validity and objectifying it in instrument development. Nursing Practice Today, 1(3), 163-171.
