Convergent and concurrent validity both indicate how well a test score and another variable compare to one another.
However, convergent validity indicates how well one measure corresponds to other measures of the same or similar constructs. These measures do not have to be obtained at the same time.
Concurrent validity instead assesses how well a measure aligns with a benchmark or “gold-standard,” which can be a ground truth or another validated measure. Both measurements should be taken at the same time.
Continue reading: What is the difference between convergent and concurrent validity?
Criterion validity measures how well a test corresponds to another measure, or criterion. The two types of criterion validity are concurrent and predictive validity.
Continue reading: What are the two types of criterion validity?
Construct validity assesses how well a test measures the concept it was meant to measure, whereas predictive validity evaluates to what degree a test can predict a future outcome or behavior.
Continue reading: What is the difference between construct validity and predictive validity?
The interview type with the highest predictive validity differs based on the goal of the interview.
- Generally speaking, a structured interview has the highest predictive validity.
- Unstructured interviews have the lowest predictive validity, especially in recruitment or job performance settings.
- Semi-structured interviews have adequate predictive validity but not as high as structured interviews.
Situational questions, work sample requests, and interview questions about past behavior are the best question types in the case of job interviews.
When designing job interview questions, make sure to minimize bias and to also account for other types of validity, such as construct validity and content validity.
You can use QuillBot’s Grammar Checker to make sure your interview questions are error-free.
Continue reading: Which type of interview has been shown to have the highest predictive validity?
To ensure high external validity, it’s important to draw a sample that’s representative of the population you want to generalize to. It’s always best to choose a probability sampling (also known as random sampling) method for this.
The most popular sampling methods are stratified sampling, systematic sampling, simple random sampling, and cluster sampling.
A probability sampling method also increases other types of validity, such as internal validity, and it reduces bias.
Continue reading: What kind of sample is best for external validity?
Random assignment can increase external validity, but it has a bigger impact on internal validity.
Random assignment helps to reduce confounding variables and ensures that the treatment and control groups are comparable in all aspects except for the independent variable.
This increases the confidence that any observed differences between the groups can be attributed to the treatment rather than other factors, which means an increase in internal validity.
It can also improve external validity because random assignment of participants prevents researchers from inadvertently selecting participants who may be more or less likely to respond to the treatment.
However, the external validity may still be limited by sampling bias if the participants are not representative of the target population, which is why choosing the appropriate sampling method is also important to ensure external validity.
A probability sampling method, such as simple random sampling, stratified sampling, cluster sampling, or systematic sampling, is always the best choice.
Continue reading: Does random assignment increase external validity?
Content validity and criterion validity are two types of validity in research:
- Content validity ensures that an instrument measures all elements of the construct it intends to measure.
- A survey to investigate depression has high content validity if its questions cover all relevant aspects of the construct “depression.”
- Criterion validity ensures that an instrument corresponds with other “gold standard” measures of the same construct.
- A shortened version of an established anxiety assessment instrument has high criterion validity if the outcomes of the new version are similar to those of the original version.
Continue reading: What is the difference between content and criterion validity?
Content validity and predictive validity are two types of validity in research:
- Content validity ensures that an instrument accurately measures all elements of the construct it intends to measure.
- A test designed to measure anxiety has high content validity if its questions cover all relevant aspects of the construct “anxiety.”
- Predictive validity demonstrates that a measure can forecast future behavior, performance, or outcomes. It is a subtype of criterion validity.
- A test designed to predict student retention has high predictive validity if it accurately predicts which students still participate in the study program 2 years later.
Continue reading: What is the difference between content validity and predictive validity?
Ecological validity is a subtype of external validity that is specifically concerned with the extent to which the study environment, tasks, and conditions reflect the real-world settings in which the behavior naturally occurs.
External validity also consists of population validity, which refers to the extent to which the results of a study can be generalized to the larger population from which the sample was drawn.
Continue reading: What is the difference between ecological validity and external validity?
When a study has high ecological validity, the findings are more likely to generalize to real-world situations, making them more applicable and useful for practical purposes, such as improving witness testimony and investigative procedures.
High ecological validity minimizes the influence of factors that can affect results, such as laboratory settings or overly structured procedures, which can lead to biases or unrepresentative data.
Ecological validity is a subtype of external validity.
Continue reading: Why is it important for a study of eyewitness memory to have a high level of ecological validity?
