Convergent and Divergent Validity description and analysis
Summary
TLDRDr. Dan discusses convergent and divergent validity, explaining their definitions, testing methods, and interpretation of results. Convergent validity is shown when items within the same factor correlate with effect sizes between 0.30 and 0.70, indicating they're measuring the same concept. Divergent validity involves ensuring items across different factors have lower correlations (below 0.30) to confirm they measure distinct concepts. He explains that while a lack of divergent validity isn't always negative, it’s crucial to differentiate constructs, especially when assessing concepts like emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and personal accomplishment within burnout studies.
Takeaways
- 🧐 The video discusses convergent and divergent validity, including their definitions, testing methods, and result interpretations.
- 🔍 To test for convergent validity, a correlation analysis is conducted, specifically a Pearson correlation on individual items rather than totals or averages.
- 📈 For convergent validity, the effect size of the correlation should ideally be between 0.30 and 0.70, indicating that items are measuring the same construct.
- 🟡 High correlation among items within the emotional exhaustion factor suggests they are measuring a similar concept.
- 🟢 The depersonalization items have slightly lower correlations but still fall within the acceptable range, indicating they measure a similar construct.
- 🔵 Personal accomplishment items have lower correlations, suggesting they may be interpreted or responded to differently by participants.
- 🤔 Divergent validity is tested by comparing items across different factors, aiming for an effect size below 0.30 to show they measure distinct constructs.
- 🚫 Lack of divergent validity (high correlations between different factors) doesn't necessarily indicate a problem, as some constructs are expected to be related.
- 😐 Face validity, although not always considered scientific, is important for understanding if variables make sense in relation to each other.
- 📝 The script provides an example of how to write up results, indicating whether convergent or divergent validity is present between different factors.
- 🔄 The process of reviewing each item for validity is repeated for all factors to ensure that they measure distinct constructs where appropriate.
Q & A
What is convergent validity?
-Convergent validity refers to the degree to which two or more measures that theoretically should be related are indeed observed to be related.
What is divergent or discriminant validity?
-Divergent or discriminant validity is the extent to which a test measures something different from what other tests are designed to measure.
What is the recommended effect size range for convergent validity?
-The effect size of the correlation for convergent validity should be between 0.30 and 0.70.
What does it mean if an item's correlation is over 0.70 in terms of convergent validity?
-While an item's correlation over 0.70 is not ideal, it is of minimal concern as long as most items meet the requirements, indicating they are measuring relatively the same thing.
What is the significance of conducting a correlation analysis on each item rather than the totals or averages of the factors?
-Analyzing each item individually helps to ensure that each item is contributing to the measurement of the intended construct and not just the overall factor.
What are the three factors of burnout mentioned in the script?
-The three factors of burnout mentioned are emotional exhaustion (EE), depersonalization (DP), and personal accomplishment.
Why is it important to look at the correlations between different factors when assessing divergent validity?
-Examining the correlations between different factors helps to ensure that each factor is distinct and not simply a repetition of another, which would indicate divergent validity.
What does it imply if the effect size between two factors is below 0.30?
-An effect size below 0.30 suggests that the two factors are not highly related, supporting the idea that they are measuring different constructs.
What does it mean if divergent validity is not revealed between two factors?
-If divergent validity is not revealed, it means that the two factors are moderately to highly correlated, which could indicate that they are measuring similar or overlapping constructs.
Why is face validity considered important despite some researchers dismissing it as unscientific?
-Face validity is important because it relates to the common-sense understanding of whether a measure appears to tap the construct it is supposed to measure, which can provide initial insight into the validity of a test.
How can you interpret the results of a correlation analysis for personal accomplishment in terms of divergent validity?
-If the correlation between personal accomplishment and the other factors of burnout is low and not significant, it suggests that personal accomplishment is a distinct construct that is not highly related to emotional exhaustion or depersonalization.
Outlines
🔍 Understanding Convergent and Divergent Validity
In this paragraph, Dr. Dan introduces the concepts of convergent and divergent validity in the context of psychological assessment. He explains that convergent validity is demonstrated when items within a factor correlate with each other, typically with an effect size between 0.30 and 0.70. The example provided involves assessing burnout, with factors such as emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and personal accomplishment. Dr. Dan discusses the results of a Pearson correlation analysis, noting that while one item exceeds the recommended effect size, it is not a significant concern. He emphasizes that high correlations within factors indicate that the items are measuring similar constructs. Divergent validity, on the other hand, is when items from different factors do not correlate highly, ideally with an effect size below 0.30. Dr. Dan points out that moderate to high correlations between emotional exhaustion and depersonalization are expected, as these constructs are often experienced together.
📊 Evaluating Discriminant and Face Validity
Dr. Dan continues the discussion by exploring discriminant validity, which is shown when items from different factors do not correlate highly, indicating that they measure distinct constructs. He uses the example of emotional exhaustion and personal accomplishment, where the correlations are low, suggesting that these factors are indeed separate. He also touches on face validity, a concept that some researchers may dismiss but which Dr. Dan argues is important. Face validity refers to whether a test makes sense to the average person and whether the items appear to measure what they are intended to measure. Dr. Dan suggests that while high correlations between certain factors may not indicate discriminant validity, they can be acceptable if they align with face validity and theoretical expectations. He concludes by reiterating the importance of understanding when to expect convergent and divergent validity in psychological assessments.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Convergent Validity
💡Divergent Validity
💡Correlation Analysis
💡Effect Size
💡Emotional Exhaustion
💡Depersonalization
💡Personal Accomplishment
💡Pearson Correlation
💡Burnout
💡Face Validity
Highlights
Convergent and Divergent validity are discussed in the context of validity testing.
Correlation analysis is the first step for testing convergent and divergent validity.
Pearson correlation is used to analyze each item rather than totals or averages of factors.
Three factors of burnout are identified: emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and personal accomplishment.
Convergent validity requires correlation effect sizes between 0.30 and 0.70.
Items associated with emotional exhaustion mostly meet the convergent validity criteria.
One item exceeds the 0.70 threshold but is not a significant concern.
Depersonalization items have slightly lower but acceptable effect sizes.
Personal accomplishment items show lower effect sizes, indicating possible differences in participant responses.
Divergent validity is tested by comparing different factors with an effect size below 0.30.
Correlations between emotional exhaustion and depersonalization are above 0.30, indicating a lack of divergent validity.
Face validity is considered important despite some researchers' skepticism.
Divergent validity is revealed between emotional exhaustion and personal accomplishment with effect sizes well below 0.30.
The significance of divergent validity is discussed in terms of measuring distinct constructs.
The importance of understanding convergent and divergent validity within factor analysis is emphasized.
The practical implications of validity testing for assessing burnout are highlighted.
The video provides a comprehensive guide on how to interpret results of validity testing.
Transcripts
hello this is Dr Dan this video we will
discuss convergent and Divergent
validity including their definition
testing for convergent and Divergent
validity and interpreting the results
the first thing you'll need to do with
your data
is conduct a correlation analysis in
this case I've I've done a Pearson
correlation and you want to run a
correlation not on any totals or
averages of the factors but on each item
in this example over here on the left
you can see there are three items
associated with EE which is emotional
exhaustion three items associated with
DP which is depersonalization and three
items associated with personal
accomplishment
these are
three factors that are included in the
concept of burnout just for your
information
now when we want to look at convergent
validity
researchers will say that the effect
size of the correlation should be
between 0.30 and 0.70
and so what we have here in each of
these color-coded
areas here and yellow green and blue we
have the correlations with emotional
exhaustion here in yellow
depersonalization and green and personal
accomplishment in blue
as you can see with emotional exhaustion
each of these three items correlate with
an effect size that for the most part
meets the requirements now there is one
that's over 0.70 but that's that's
really of minimal concern what we want
to be concerned about here
is just that they are correlating with a
high effect size meaning that each of
these three items is measuring
relatively the same thing that's kind of
a sort of a basic way of understanding
that
the for depersonalization the the items
are a slightly lower however they still
fall within the parameters of 0.30 and
0.70 effect size
and then when we look at personal
accomplishment we see these items are
much or considerably lower they they do
fall within the parameters of 0.30.70
for the most part
however at a low effect and so basically
what this means is those three items
when participants take this assessment
uh they they may be answering them
slightly differently in other words uh
those items are phrased in such a way
where the participants are not going to
respond uh in like an identically for
each one of those three items less so or
more so depending how you want to look
at it for emotional exhaustion where
they would be if they're emotional
exhausted for the first item
um you know if they interpret that form
of exhaustion for that well they
probably will for the second and the
third as well because those are probably
phrased very similarly
okay so in this case again this is
convergent validity
where each of these
three factors within each of these three
they are converging on each other
another way of looking at this which I
discussed in another video is Chromebox
Alpha now that's looking at reliability
but in many ways the concepts are I
don't want to say necessarily the same
but extremely similar where we are
looking to see if the three items are
kind of matching up with each other
now let's look at
divergent or also sometimes called
discriminant validity in this case we do
not necessarily want to a high degree
the items correlating with each other so
in this case the effect size should be
below 0.30
what we have here is in yellow again
emotional exhaustion there's these these
three items and now we are going to
compare not within
emotional exhaustion itself not within
that factor but we are going to compare
that to the other two factors so in this
case we look at the correlations between
emotional exhaustion and
depersonalization
all three of the
ee factors and the BP factors and then
the same with PA personal accomplishment
in this case
we want to look again to show diversion
or discriminate validity the effect size
below 0.30 and in this case they are not
they're above 0.30 at uh moderate to
sometimes a high effect size now is this
a bad thing well it does not show
discriminant validity or Divergent
validity and I use those words again
interchangeably
however that's not necessarily a bad
thing because we also expect
that these items will correlate because
research will continuously show that
emotional exhaustion and
depersonalization If you experience one
you're likely experiencing the other as
well
now
many researchers will say there is no
such thing as face validity that it's
not really a scientific concept however
I'll demonstrate here that it's actually
extremely important in the in the
concept does apply to something like
this so in other words face validity
has to do with just kind of like Common
Sense understanding your variables and
so at face value if you will we would
expect somewhat of a correlation here so
therefore we would expect that the
effect size maybe will you know not
necessarily be under 0.30 now I would
say it'd be more problematic if these
were all like you know very high effect
like .70 and perhaps higher because then
maybe they're kind of measuring the same
thing
okay so this is acceptable but we're
looking here and how we would write this
up is basically say that diversion or
discriminant validity was uh you know
not revealed between emotional
exhaustion depersonalization now on the
other hand
it was between emotional exhaustion and
personal accomplishment because all of
these effect sizes here first off
they're not even significant except for
one and they are well below 0.30
now what does that tell us well
basically what that says is first off we
do have divergent or discriminant
validity and I know at again you know
face value because I understand the
measure that that seems logical because
just because someone is emotionally
exhausted in their job they'll likely
experience also depersonalization but
not necessarily personal accomplishment
because someone can be emotionally
exhausted in their job but still have a
great sense of accomplishment if they
really believe they're helping someone
out so that is why you do not
necessarily see a high correlation
between the two and you definitely see
discriminant validity that these are
measuring two different things
now when we compare depersonalization so
now what we're basically doing is we're
doing the exact same thing
that we did with emotional exhaust and
now we're looking at depersonalization
so in yellow you have depersonalization
items and we're looking now at emotional
exhaustion which is to the left in this
case and personal accomplishment which
is below
just like we you know just like we
experienced below excuse me previously
and we we again have these these values
over here which we already discussed uh
in this case new values that we're now
looking at is depersonalization personal
accomplishment which here again low
values revealing that these are are you
know demonstrate that these are two
different
Concepts that we're looking at two
different constructs if you will and uh
and the reasoning is the same as I gave
previously with emotional exhaustion and
deep and and personal accomplishment is
depersonalization and personal
accomplishment can be two different
things you can still experience
depersonalization but uh and be exhaust
and and experience burnout but also have
a sense of personal accomplishment and
then finally
the way you would look at personal
accomplishment is you look at all of
these items to the left which we've
already gone over in in the previous
ones I just wanted to show you these
three examples of how you review each
one
I hope that helps you out and again it
is important to understand that
convergent validity is something that we
perhaps want to see within each of our
factors Divergent validity is something
that we do not necessarily want to see
at high levels otherwise we're perhaps
measuring the same thing
浏览更多相关视频
Intelligence (4 of 6)
Within Subjects Design - Research Methods in Psychology/Social Sciences
SEM Series (2016) 3. Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA)
Research Methods and Design (AP Psychology Review: Unit 0 Topic 2)
Operational Definitions and Construct Validity (Intro Psych Tutorial #9)
Forms of Validity in Research and Statistics
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)