Validation Guidelines - Article Example

Validation Guidelines This article examines validation guidelines by offering research heuristics for reinvigorating the search for validity through five methods of validity. These are content validity, construct validity, reliability, manipulation validity, and statistical conclusion validity. Content validity is concerned with representation and the essential question that it poses is if the instrumentation pulls in a representative manner from all the ways that could be utilized in measuring the content of a particular construct.

Construct validity involves the operationalization or measurement between constructs. The concern is that instrument items that are selected for a given construct are considered together and compared to other latent constructs, a reasonable operationalization of the construct. In this validity, validation is not focused on the substance of the items, but their meaningfulness within their usual theoretical setting. While construct validity involves measurement between constructs, reliability involves measurement within a construct, with the concern being that the instrument items that are selected for a given construct can be taken together.

Manipulation validity is traditionally inserted into experimental tests or procedures to measure the extent to which treatments are perceived by the subjects. Statistical conclusion validity assesses the mathematical relationships that exist between variables, and makes inferences about whether this statistical formulation correctly expresses the true co-variation. This validity deals with the quality of the statistical evidence of co-variation such as sources of error, the use of appropriate statistical tools, and bias.

Type I and Type II errors are classic violations of this kind of validity.The article by David and Joseph tries to establish a method for investigative the cognitive processes and knowledge structures of expert salespeople. It is a study that focuses on the mental process rather than the overt behavior of sales people. Therefore, the research can be termed as activity-oriented. This is an approach which recognizes that people are goal-seeking, and therefore behavior simply becomes the end result of a complex set of underlying mental processes.

In the study, the researchers provide such a method for studying the cognitive processes and knowledge structures of highly skilled or expert salespeople. The article derives some data using such this method. However, this data is only used for illustrative purposes with an intention of clarifying the method. It does not provide an in-depth analysis of these cognitive processes or knowledge structures. The authors have adequately tried to address the core issues of the study through empirical study and drawing from previous research.

The article uses the previously validated data as the positivist design contingency. The article expands on research that is already conducted regarding mental processes and their effect on performance and behavior. The domains are intractable in that they are hard to measure. The research seems to be a confirmatory type of research in that it confirms the relationships that exist between mental processes and behavior. the article provides an adequate theoretical framework which uses relationships between constructs.

Most of the research is drawn from previously validated data, largely applying the validated instrumentation to new phenomenon. It uses research findings on cognitive processes in studying the behavior in sales people. This article therefore employs a range of validity techniques, almost all the techniques in trying to establish the findings. Such an article can be described as valid and can therefore be used in research studies as reference materials. It is an article that can be described as reliable and credible.

ReferencesRentz, O. J. & Shepherd, D. C. (1990) A Method of Investigating the Cognitive Processes and Knowledge Structures of Expert Salespeople. Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, Vol. 10, fall 1990, pp. 55-70.Straub, D.,Boudreau, M. & Gefen, D. (2004) Validation Guidelines for IS Positivist Research. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, Vol. 13, 2004, pp. 380-427.