scholarly journals Towards Construct Validity of Relational Aggression: An Examination of the Children's Social Behavior Scale

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cassandra M Brandes ◽  
Kathleen Wade Reardon ◽  
Allison Shields ◽  
Jennifer L Tackett

Relational aggression – or behavior intended to harm the relationships of its victims – has been the focus of interdisciplinary study across developmental, clinical, personality, and social psychology in the last several decades. One of the primary measures used to assess relational aggression in youth is the Children’s Social Behavior Scale (CSBS; Crick & Grotpeter, 1995), but despite its common usage, the construct validity of this measure has not been comprehensively assessed. In the present study, we used a multistage construct validity framework to thoroughly investigate the nature of relational aggression across six community samples totaling 3,102 youth and their caregivers. We used multiple methods to map the reliability, internal or structural validity, and external validity of this scale. Through these analyses, we found that CSBS Relational Aggression demonstrated strong internal consistency, test-retest, and interrater reliability as well as a robust single factor structure and invariance across multiple demographic groups. External validity analyses positioned relational aggression within a theoretically consistent nomological net including psychopathology, personality, and social developmental factors. Contrary to concerns about the validity of self- and parent-reports of relational aggression, both parent- and youth-report forms of the CSBS Relational Aggression scale demonstrated strong reliability and validity. While construct validation has received inadequate attention in the psychological literature to date, through this project, we aimed to demonstrate how this approach may be used to investigate existing measures across psychological research.

2007 ◽  
Vol 33 (5) ◽  
pp. 775-780 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen Fitzner

The purpose of this article is to provide a brief review of reliability and validity testing. These concepts are important to researchers who are choosing techniques and/or developing tools that will be applied and evaluated in diabetes education practice. Several types of reliability and validity testing are defined, and an easy-to-use check sheet is provided for research purposes. Following testing for the basic aspects of reliability and validity such as face and construct validity, a tool may be appropriate for use in practice settings. Those conducting comprehensive outcomes evaluations, however, may desire additional validation such as testing for external validity. Diabetes educators can and should incorporate rigorous testing for these important aspects when conducting assessments of techniques and tools relating to diabetes self-management training.


2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 316-344
Author(s):  
Leandre R. Fabrigar ◽  
Duane T. Wegener ◽  
Richard E. Petty

In recent years, psychology has wrestled with the broader implications of disappointing rates of replication of previously demonstrated effects. This article proposes that many aspects of this pattern of results can be understood within the classic framework of four proposed forms of validity: statistical conclusion validity, internal validity, construct validity, and external validity. The article explains the conceptual logic for how differences in each type of validity across an original study and a subsequent replication attempt can lead to replication “failure.” Existing themes in the replication literature related to each type of validity are also highlighted. Furthermore, empirical evidence is considered for the role of each type of validity in non-replication. The article concludes with a discussion of broader implications of this classic validity framework for improving replication rates in psychological research.


2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 117-125
Author(s):  
Johannes Schult ◽  
Rebecca Schneider ◽  
Jörn R. Sparfeldt

Abstract. The need for efficient personality inventories has led to the wide use of short instruments. The corresponding items often contain multiple, potentially conflicting descriptors within one item. In Study 1 ( N = 198 university students), the reliability and validity of the TIPI (Ten-Item Personality Inventory) was compared with the reliability and validity of a modified TIPI based on items that rephrased each two-descriptor item into two single-descriptor items. In Study 2 ( N = 268 university students), we administered the BFI-10 (Big Five Inventory short version) and a similarly modified version of the BFI-10 without two-descriptor items. In both studies, reliability and construct validity values occasionally improved for separated multi-descriptor items. The inventories with multi-descriptor items showed shortcomings in some factors of the TIPI and the BFI-10. However, the other scales worked comparably well in the original and modified inventories. The limitations of short personality inventories with multi-descriptor items are discussed.


1997 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicki R. Crick ◽  
Juan F. Casas ◽  
Monique Mosher

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document