Content, Empirical, and Construct Validity as Measurements and Instruments - Research Paper Example

? Measurements and Instruments for a Quantitative Research Plan Introduction In quantitative research, questionnaires are good instruments for a measurement. As Babbie (2013) argues, although questionnaires are mainly used in structured studies, they are also extremely efficient in other forms of research and data collection such as field work and surveys (p. 261). However, questionnaires as a way of measurement can face a number challenges that the researcher would need to take considerations of. Content Validity Content validity refers to the wholeness of a study to make sure that all aspects of the study are taken care of (Cottrell & McKenzie, 2010). In my research, I will seek to achieve content validity by designing questions that cover all aspects of the study I am carrying out. Each aspect of the study I will be carrying out will be addressed with at least three questions. Empirical Validity Empirical validity refers to how scores correlate across different contexts. For instance, a student’s IQ score should correlate with his scores in class tests. To achieve empirical validity, I will seek to use multiple dimension studies that consider various contexts to see how the responses score in these different contexts. According to Somekh and Lewin (2005), research is like reading data and making connection between varies aspects of the data in order to derive a form of meaning. Construct Validity Construct validity is how well the results of a study correspond to the already existing philosophical constructs within the field of concern (Knowlegde Base, 2010). To achieve construct validity, I will create my theories and my questions based on already existing and stable philosophical constructs. To make sure that data collected through a questionnaire are reliable and valid, it is necessary to observe the following. Clear instructions It is necessary to give clear information as a way to make sure the subjects understand the questions properly and give their feedback in the most appropriate way possible (Babbie, 2008). Failing to have clear instructions or well formulated questions can lead to a misunderstanding that can make the subjects give wrong information either by mistake or by design. This can be a terribly significant setback to the validity and reliability of research and therefore, the researcher should avoid this kind of scenarios as much as possible. Having clear instructions on the way the subjects are supposed to answer the questions is particularly beneficial because it helps in increasingly validity of the study. Avoiding Ambiguous Questions Another issue that can lead to lack of validity of the data collected using a questionnaire is the ambiguity of the questions (Lewin & Someth, 2005). Ambiguity can lead to three negative issues. First, it can make the subjects misunderstand the questions and, therefore, give wrong answers. Secondly, it can lead to the respondents feeling uncomfortable about the study and, therefore, either decline to participate or lie about the information they give. For instance, if a questionnaire asks a respondent if they have ever been arrested, it is necessary to give a short explanation of the reason for asking this information, or the subjects may have the wrong interpretation. The third issue with ambiguous question is the fact that the researcher may also misinterpret the results (Lewin & Someth, 2005). This is especially so where the designer of the questions will not be one who will interpret the results. Avoiding Irrelevant Questions In designing the questions for questionnaires, it is necessary to be strictly professional as well as precise. The issue with measuring data results will have to be affected by the error caused by the method, errors caused by failing to understand the instructions, and the environment error (Jackson, 2010). This will assist in mitigating the risk of the issues discussed above, such as ambiguity and lack of clearness. In this regard, it is crucial that the designers be exceedingly concise and avoid asking for information that is not relevant to the study being carried out (Foddy, 1994). This will also increase the reliability of the results because the respondents are more likely to offer reliable information when they feel that the questions are relevant and that the task (of filling the questionnaire) will not take longer that they want to take. The same applies to interviews, and the interviewer has to ensure the questions are appropriate, concise and to the point. Reliability of the study will also be determined by standardization of the procedures of instrumentation (Kothari, 2008). Avoiding Personal Information Where Possible This issue is quite similar to the one discussed above, but it is different in that the questions can be relevant but insensitive. Even after making sure that all questions that they will include in the questionnaire are relevant to the study being carried out, it is necessary to scheme the questions over and over again to remove or redraft any questions that may seem personal to any of the potential respondents. Achieving Anonymity Where Necessary Depending on the nature of the study, sometimes, especially with regard to questionnaires, it is necessary to afford the respondents anonymity in order to help them give the right information without fear. This is usually necessary in cases where either the privacy or security of the individual is in danger. The researcher should use anonymity as a way to protect the subjects. However, it is also good for the researcher to understand that anonymity can also be used by malicious respondents to sabotage the study by offering erroneous or exaggerated information because they know that they will not be identified. Anonymity is usually easier to implement where questionnaires are used. On the other hand, in the case of an interview, the interviewee may need to be disclosed to the interviewer. In this case, the interviewer can give his word to the interviewee that the information they give will be kept confidential. Above all, it is necessary to inform the subjects of the need to give genuine information as a way to achieve credible results. Where necessary, the researcher should take pains to explain to the respondents the implications of them giving wrong information, and encourage them to give the right information. Including Questions That Countercheck Each Other for Validity In interviews and questionnaires, the researcher can use questions that countercheck each other in order to check the validity of the answers. These kinds of questions are designed in such a way that if the genuine answer for one of them is “A,” the genuine answer for the other should be “B.” This can help the researcher to identify when the respondents are not offering genuine answers. However, it is hard to prepare these kinds of questions. Advantages of Using Interviews and Questionnaires There are a number of advantages of using interviews and questionnaires as a way to carry out a research Advantages for Using Questionnaires Questionnaires are effective in that they can reach a wider audience, thus giving the study a broad aspect which can lead to better and more reliable results (Bernard, 2000). One questionnaire can be copied and given to as many respondents as possible. As McNabb (2008) asserts, another advantage of using questionnaires is the flexibility they give the researcher, thus making it possible for the researcher to modify he questions to suit any kind of research project. The researcher is able to manipulate the question to give the kind of data they want, whether for a quantitative or qualitative study. Interviews The main advantage of using interviews is the direct feedback that the research can get from the respondents. Interviews can also help in observing body language and, therefore, give the researcher a chance to use follow-up questions as a way to identify any hidden data. Interviews can be extremely useful in cases where the researcher is not abundantly clear about the information they are looking for. Theory Development Theory development can be a truly hectic part of the research process. According to Reynolds (2006), developing theories needs some guidelines in order to develop a theory that is consistent with the scientific requirements. One essential quality of a theory is that it should be multi-subjective, which means that it must make scientific sense across a number of scientific disciplines. Since a theory is not rigid and does not have clear boundaries, it is necessary to have a theory that is as abstractive as possible without limiting it to either space or time. A theory should, therefore, be beneficial in making sure that it will help in understanding certain phenomena. Developing a theory can depend on a number of factors that determine how useful the theory is going to be in the scientific realm. Conclusion One of the most valuable things in doing research is ensuring that the tools that will be used will provide reliable and valid data. This is because the quality of information that a study or a research project will give will depend on the tools used to collect data, the instrumentation process used, and reliability of the instruments used. Theory development is also extremely useful and must be considered in the development of a good study, with regard to all fundamentals of theory development. References Babbie, E. (2008). The basics of social research. London: Cengage Learning. Babbie, E. (2013). The practice of social research. London: Cengage Learning. Base, K. (2010, October 20). Construct validity. Retrieved March 30th, 2013, from Research Methods: http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/constval.php. Bernard, R. (2000). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. New York, NY: SAGE Publishers. Cottrell, R., & McKenzie, J. F. (2010). Health promotion & education research methods: Using the five chapter thesis/ dissertation model. Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning. Foddy, W. &. (1994). Constructing questions for interviews and questionnaires: Theory and practice in social research. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press. Jackson, S. (2010). Research methods: A modular approach. London: Cengage Learning. Kothari, C. (2008). Research methodology: Methods and techniques. New Age International. McNabb, D. (2008). Research methods in public administration and nonprofit management: Quantitative and qualitative approaches. Boston, MA: M.E. Sharpe. Reynolds, P. (2006). A primer in theory construction. London: Pearson/AandB. Somekh, B. L. (2005). Research methods in the social sciences. New York, NY: SAGE Publishers. Read More