Back to content-based validity
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.20882/adicciones.1213Keywords:
Validity, content, Aiken's V.Abstract
The development and validation of self-reported measuring instruments as a way of quantifying addictive behaviors is currently common practice. These instruments in articles about addiction, however, are dominated by methods involving structural equations and, therefore, evidence based on internal structure. This is the case even though it is known that there are other sources of evidence, such as test consequence, relationships with other variables, content and response processes, which are considered to contribute methodological rigor when researching addiction. Given the above, the author of this letter would like to offer readers an expert rater grid, which can be requested in its entirety and free of charge. Once the raters’ answers have been obtained, they can be quantified by Aiken’s V, a coefficient which is simple to calculate and easy to interpret.References
American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education (2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
Bonifay, W., Lane, S. P. & Reise, S. P. (2017). Three concerns with applying a bifactor model as a structure of psychopathology. Clinical Psychological Science, 5, 184-186. doi:10.1177/2167702616657069.
Charter, R. A. (2003). A breakdown of reliability coefficients by test type and reliability method, and the clinical implications of low reliability. Journal of General Psychology, 130, 290-304. doi:10.1080/00221300309601160.
Cohen, R. & Swerdlik, M. (2001). Pruebas y evaluación psicológicas: Introducción a las pruebas y a la medición. (4ª ed.). México: Mc Graw Hill.
Escobar-Pérez, J. & Cuervo-Martínez, A. (2008). Validez de contenido y juicio de expertos: Una aproximación a su utilización. Avances en Medición, 6, 27-36.
Fonseca, E. (2017). Methodological rigour in the study of addictions. Adicciones, 29, 147-149. doi:10.20882/adicciones.994.
Haynes, S. N., Richard, D. & Kubany, E. S. (1995). Content validity in psychological assessment: A functional approach to concepts and methods. Psychological Assessment, 7, 238-247. doi:10.1037/1040-3590.7.3.238.
Mezquita, L., Camacho, L., Suso-Ribera, C., Ortet, G. & Ibáñez, M. I. (2018). Desarrollo y validación de la versión corta del cuestionario sobre expectativas de los efectos del alcohol (EQ-SF). Adicciones, 30, 271-281. doi:10.20882/adicciones.920.
Mezquita, L., Ruiz-Valero, L., Martínez-Gómez, N., Ibáñez, M. I. & Ortet Fabregat, G. (2019). Desarrollo y validación de la versión breve del cuestionario de motivos de consumo de marihuana (MMM SF). Adicciones, 31, 106-116. doi:10.20882/adicciones.979.
Napitupulu, D., Syafrullah, M., Rahim, R., Amar, A. & Sucahyo, Y. G. (2018). Content validity of critical success factors for e-Government implementation in Indonesia. In IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 352, 1-10. doi:10.1088/1757-899X/352/1/012058.
Penfield, R. D. & Giacobbi, Jr, P. R. (2004). Applying a score confidence interval to Aiken’s item content-relevance index. Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science, 8, 213-225. doi:10.1207/s15327841mpee0804_3.
