Lecture 10 Flashcards
What are the 9 steps of a research proposal
- introduction
- problem statement
- hypothesis
- literature review
- methods
- limitations
- significance
- references
- appendix items
(blank)-The extent to which a test (or indicator/instrument) accurately measures what it is supposed to – 4 types
validity
(blank) Validity
• Degree to which a measure ‘obviously’ involves the performance being measured
• Weakest type of validity
• The test “seems” to be valid
• No quantification about how well the test measures the dependent variable
– e.g., 50 m sprint used to assess running speed
• Taken at face value
face/logical
(blank) Validity
• Degree to which an instrument accurately measures a theoretical construct or trait it was designed to measure
– e.g., depression, anxiety, intelligence
• Used when the dependent variable is difficult to measure and there is no established gold standard
• Often assessed by:
– Correlation
– Known group difference method
• Comparing test scores between groups that should differ
construct
(blank) Validity
– Degree to which a measure/test is related to the criterion (gold standard)
– A method to establish the validity of a new test
– Both tests performed on the same sample at the same time (concurrently)
• Body fat: BIA vs. DXA
• CV Fitness: Step test vs. VO2max
• Physical & Mental Health: SF-8 vs. SF-36
concurrent
(blank) Validity
– Degree to which scores of predictor accurately predict criterion (can compare to gold
standard)
– A test is developed to predict a criterion measure
– Correlation between the test and criterion is used to determine validity
• Injury prediction: do scores on
Functional Movement Screen predict injury?
predictive
Which 2 types of validity are content and criterion related?
content related:
face validity
construct validity
criterion related:
concurrent validity
predictive validity
(blank)-Measures the consistency or repeatability of test scores or data.
– Keep in mind that measures can be reliable but NOT valid….BUT measures can never be valid if not reliable
• Methods of establishing – Stability (test - re-test) – Alternate Forms (parallel) – Internal Consistency – Inter-rater
reliability
(blank) Reliability
• Same test is administered on two-separate occasions
and the results are correlated
– Test-retest method
• Not good for tests where learning is a performance
factor
• Good to evaluate the measurement skill of a laboratory
device or technician
stability
(blank) Forms
• measures the correlation between two ‘equivalent’
versions of a test.
– You use it when you have two different
assessment tools or sets of questions designed
to measure the same thing.
• If there is a high correlation between the tests,
they can be said to be consistent/reliable
alternate
(blank) Consistency
• Used to show how consistent the scores of a test are
within itself
– Correlation between multiple items in a test intended
to measure the same construct
• The questions within themselves are consistent
• Split-Half Method
– A correlation is performed on the results of two
halves of one test. If they are highly correlated, the
test has internal consistency
• Good for written tests
• Numerous physical performance trials
internal
The (blank) method assesses the internal consistency of a test, such as psychometric tests and questionnaires. … This is done by comparing the results of one half of a test with the results from the other half. A test can be split in half in several ways, e.g. first half and second half, or by odd and even numbers.
split-half
(blank) Reliability
• Test of the objectivity between testers
inter-rater
• (blank) – Do the same thing twice, is it stable?
• (blank) – If you used another option, are scores
related?
• (blank) – Within itself it is reliable
• (blank) – multiple researchers making observations
or ratings about the same topic
stability
alternate
internal consistency
inter-rater
• When you step on a scale 1 minute later the number is
the exact same (blank)
• When two people evaluate someone’s performance after
the job interview, they rate on the same scale(blank)
• Whether you complete the Pittsburgh or Edinburgh
depression scale, you get the same diagnosis(blank)
stability
inter-rater reliability
alternate
(blank) correlation (r): relationship between two
variables
• Coefficient values may range from -1 to +1
• where 0 is weak relation and 1 is a perfect relation
pearson
Positive correlation
– (blank) number on variable X and Y
– E.g. Long jump: relationship between
distance and power test is positive. Why?
high
Negative correlation
– (blank) number on variable X
– (blank) number on variable Y
– E.g. Long jump: Relationship between jumping
distance and running time is almost always negative.
Why?
high
low
(blank) Coefficients (R) • comparing two values for same variable • The two scores are correlated and the reliability coefficient is produced For example: R >.85 (or higher) for maximal physical effort tests and precise laboratory tests
reliability
Cronbach’s (blank) α : Internal Consistency –Reliability of questionnaire items/scales – α >.70 (acceptable)
alpha
(blank) is concerned with getting the right assessment and (blank) is getting the assessment right
validity
reliability
4 sources of (blank):
– Participants
• Mood, motivation, health, fatigue, prior knowledge ,
familiarity with test
– Testing
• Standardization of all test activities for all participants
– Scoring
• Competence, experience, attention to detail of scorers
(RAs)
– Instrumentation
• Maintenance and calibration
error
While (blank) validity relates to how well a study is conducted, (blank) validity relates to how applicable the findings are to the real world
internal
external
• (blank)
– Assigning numbers to various levels of a particular
concept
– Provides an indirect measure of the concept of
interest
– e.g. On a scale of 1 – 5 rank your mood
• Used to obtain information on almost any topic, object,
or subject
– Attitude, opinion, behaviour, performance,
perception
scaling
