Validity Evidence for Games as Assessment Environments

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Girlie C. Delacruz ◽  
Gregory K. W. K. Chung ◽  
Eva L. Baker
Keyword(s):  
Validity Evidence

Three Conceptual Impediments to Developing Scale Theory for Formative Scales

Methodology ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 156-164 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keith A. Markus
Keyword(s):  
Scale Development ◽  
Item Analysis ◽  
Model Fitting ◽  
Item Bias ◽  
Validity Evidence ◽  
Scale Theory ◽  
Underlying Theory ◽  
Standard Scale ◽  
Item Scores

Abstract. Bollen and colleagues have advocated the use of formative scales despite the fact that formative scales lack an adequate underlying theory to guide development or validation such as that which underlies reflective scales. Three conceptual impediments impede the development of such theory: the redefinition of measurement restricted to the context of model fitting, the inscrutable notion of conceptual unity, and a systematic conflation of item scores with attributes. Setting aside these impediments opens the door to progress in developing the needed theory to support formative scale use. A broader perspective facilitates consideration of standard scale development concerns as applied to formative scales including scale development, item analysis, reliability, and item bias. While formative scales require a different pattern of emphasis, all five of the traditional sources of validity evidence apply to formative scales. Responsible use of formative scales requires greater attention to developing the requisite underlying theory.

Validity evidence for an expectancy-based measure of safety motivation

2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald M. Truxillo ◽  
Michael A. Buck ◽  
Elizabeth A. McCune ◽  
Talya N. Bauer ◽  
Leslie B. Hammer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Validity Evidence ◽  
Safety Motivation

Development and validity evidence of the Spanish-speaking scale of sexual sensation seeking.

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patricio Mena-Chamorro ◽  
Rodrigo Ferrer
Keyword(s):  
Sexual Activity ◽  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
Sensation Seeking ◽  
Two Dimensions ◽  
Personality Factor ◽  
Validity Evidence ◽  
Measurement Instruments ◽  
Multiple Partners ◽  
Time Space ◽  
Sexual Sensation Seeking

Background: STIs, principally HIV/AIDS, are public health problems that are transmitted by sexual risk behaviours, which have been associated with the sexual sensation seeking (an specific personality factor). In South American context, there are no measurement instruments with psychometric evidence for their use and, in other contexts, only the Sexual sensation seeking scale (Kalichman et al., 1994) is available, which is outdated in content and validity evidence. The purpose of this work is development a scale, in accordance with contemporary psychometric standards, to assess sexual sensation seeking for South Americans young people and adults. Method: instrumental study, with time-space sampling (n=813) of undergraduate students from the two Chilean cities with the highest rates of HIV. Results: Final scale have 8 items to assess two dimensions: 1) sexual emotions seeking; and 2) tendency to sexual boredom. The identified structure provides adequate levels of reliability (ω> .8; α> .7), presents validity evidence, based on the internal structure of the test, using CFA and ESEM (CFI> .95, TLI> .95, RMSEA <. 06), and based on the convergence with other measures (sexual activity with multiple partners, inadequate or insufficient use of protective barriers and sexual activity under the influence of alcohol or drugs). Conclusions: The Multidimensional Scale of Sexual Sensation Seeking evidence adequate psychometric properties to evaluate the search for sexual sensations in equivalents samples.

Constructing and Evaluating a Validation Argument for a Next-Generation Alternate Assessment

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy K. Clark ◽  
Meagan Karvonen
Keyword(s):  
Data Collection ◽  
Assessment System ◽  
Alternate Assessment ◽  
Theory Of Action ◽  
Validity Evidence ◽  
Dynamic Learning ◽  
Alternate Assessments ◽  
Overall Evaluation ◽  
Computer Based ◽  
Achievement Standards

Alternate assessments based on alternate achievement standards (AA-AAS) have historically lacked broad validity evidence and an overall evaluation of the extent to which evidence supports intended uses of results. An expanding body of validation literature, the funding of two AA-AAS consortia, and advances in computer-based assessment have supported improvements in AA-AAS validation. This paper describes the validation approach used with the Dynamic Learning Maps® alternate assessment system, including development of the theory of action, claims, and interpretive argument; examples of evidence collected; and evaluation of the evidence in light of the maturity of the assessment system. We focus especially on claims and sources of evidence unique to AA-AAS and especially the Dynamic Learning Maps system design. We synthesize the evidence to evaluate the degree to which it supports the intended uses of assessment results for the targeted population. Considerations are presented for subsequent data collection efforts.

Interpretation In Qualitative Research: What, Why, How

2020 ◽  
pp. 955-982
Author(s):  
Allen Trent ◽  
Jeasik Cho
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Research ◽  
Qualitative Inquiry ◽  
The Self ◽  
Validity Evidence ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Interpretive Strategies

This chapter addresses a wide range of concepts related to interpretation in qualitative research, examines the meaning and importance of interpretation in qualitative inquiry, and explores the ways methodology, data, and the self/researcher as instrument interact and impact interpretive processes. Additionally, the chapter presents a series of strategies for qualitative researchers engaged in the process of interpretation and closes by presenting a framework for qualitative researchers designed to inform their interpretations. The framework includes attention to the key qualitative research concepts transparency, reflexivity, analysis, validity, evidence, and literature. Four questions frame the chapter: What is interpretation, and why are interpretive strategies important in qualitative research? How do methodology, data, and the researcher/self impact interpretation in qualitative research? How do qualitative researchers engage in the process of interpretation? And, in what ways can a framework for interpretation strategies support qualitative researchers across multiple methodologies and paradigms?

scholarly journals Validity Evidence and Measurement Equivalence for the Dutch Translation of the Conditional Reasoning Test for Aggression

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
James M. LeBreton ◽  
Sydney L. Reichin ◽  
Jan te Nijenhuis ◽  
Myckel Cremers ◽  
Kitty Heijden‐Lek
Keyword(s):  
Measurement Equivalence ◽  
Conditional Reasoning ◽  
Validity Evidence ◽  
Dutch Translation ◽  
Reasoning Test

Factor Structure of the Scales for Assessing Emotional Disturbance : 3 Rating Scale for Students Identified With Emotional Disturbance

2021 ◽  
pp. 019874292110123
Author(s):  
Matthew C. Lambert ◽  
Douglas Cullinan ◽  
Michael H. Epstein ◽  
Jodie Martin
Keyword(s):  
Internal Structure ◽  
Emotional Disturbance ◽  
Factor Structure ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Distinct Group ◽  
Considerable Proportion ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Validity Evidence ◽  
Common Variance

This study examined the internal structure of the Scales for Assessing Emotional Disturbance-3 Rating Scale (RS), a teacher-completed RS developed to measure emotional disturbance (ED). As defined in U.S. law and regulations, ED involves five characteristics or patterns of behavioral and emotional maladaptation. RS data obtained on a sample of students with ED were used to examine validity evidence based on the internal structure of the assessment. Of particular interest was the extent to which multivariate factors derived from the RS data conform to the five characteristics of ED stated in the definition. Results indicate that the RS data fit a 5-factor model reasonably well. A subsequent bifactor analysis identified a considerable proportion of common variance across factors, suggesting the presence of a strong general ED factor, two distinct group factors (Inability to Learn and Inappropriate Behavior), and three weak group factors. The findings provided evidence of the validity of the SAED-3 RS based on internal structure and pointed to support for use of the RS in contributing to the process of determining whether a student qualifies for the ED education disability. Implications for improved research on the nature of ED and how students with ED can be better served are discussed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document