INSTRUMENTATI
ON
INSTRUMENTATION
An important part of the research
study is the instrument in gathering
the data because the quality of
research output depends to a large
extent on the quality of research
instrument used.
INSTRUMENT
Instrument is the generic term that
researchers use for a measurement
device like survey, test, questionnaire,
and many others.
INSTRUMENT
To help distinguish between instrument
and instrumentation, consider that the
instrument is the device and
instrumentation is the course of action
which is the process of developing,
testing, and using the device.
INSTRUMENT
Researchers can choose the type of
instruments to use based on their
research questions or objectives. There
are two broad categories of
instruments namely; 1) researcher-
completed instruments and 2) subject-
completed instruments.
Researcher-completed Subject-completed
Instruments Instruments
Rating scales Questionnaires
Interview Self-checklists
schedules/guides Attitude scales
Tally sheets Personal inventories
Flowcharts Achievement/aptitude
Performance checklist tests
Time-and-motion logs Projective devices
Observation forms Sociometric devices
VALIDITY
Validity refers to the extent to which
the instrument measures what it
intends to measure and performs as it is
designed to perform. It is unusual and
nearly impossible that an instrument is
100% valid that is why validity is
generally measured in degrees.
VALIDITY
There are numerous statistical tests
and measures to assess the validity of
quantitative instruments that generally
involves pilot testing. There are three
major types of validity. These are
content validity, construct validity, and
criterion validity.
TYPES OF VALIDITY DESCRIPTION
The extent to which a research
instrument accurately measures
CONTENT VALIDITY
all aspects of a construct.
The extent to which a research
instrument (or tool) measures the
CONSTRUCT VALIDITY
intended construct.
The extent to which a research
instrument is related to other
CRITERION VALIDITY instruments that measure the
same variables.
CONTENT VALIDITY
Content validity looks at whether the
instrument adequately covers all the
content that it should with respect to
the variable. In other words, it refers to
the appropriateness of the content of
an instrument.
CONTENT VALIDITY
It answers the question “Do the
measures (questions, observation logs,
etc.) accurately assess what you want
to know?” or “Does the instrument
cover the entire domain related to the
variable, or the construct it was
designed to measure?”
CONTENT VALIDITY
A subset of content validity is face
validity, where experts are asked
their opinion about whether an
instrument measures the concept
intended.
CONSTRUCT VALIDITY
Construct validity refers to
whether you can draw inferences
about test scores related to the
concept being studied.
There are three types of evidence that can
be used to demonstrate a research
instrument has construct validity:
1. Homogeneity – this means that the instrument
measures one construct.
2. Convergence – this occurs when the instrument
measures concepts similar to that of other
instruments. Although there are no similar
instruments available this will not be possible to do
3. Theory evidence – this is evident when behavior is
similar to theoretical propositions of the construct
measured in the instrument.
CRITERION VALIDITY
A criterion is any other instrument
that measures the same variable.
Correlations can be conducted to
determine the extent to which the
different instruments measure the
same variable.
Criterion validity is measured in
three ways:
1. Convergent validity – shows that an instrument is
highly correlated with instruments measuring similar
variables. Example: geriatric suicide correlated
significantly and positively with depression, loneliness
and hopelessness
2. Divergent validity – shows that an instrument is poorly
correlated to instruments that measure different
variables. Example: there should be a low correlation
between an instrument that measures motivation and
one that measures self-efficacy
Criterion validity is measured in
three ways:
3. Predictive validity – means that the instrument
should have high correlations with future
criterion. Example: a score of high self-
efficacy related to performing a task that
should predict the likelihood a participant
completing the task
Criterion validity is measured in
three ways:
1. Concurrent Validity – Examines whether the
instrument’s results correlate with an established
measure of the same construct at the same time.
2. Predictive Validity – Assesses how well an
instrument predicts future outcomes related to the
construct being measured.
3. Postdictive Validity – Determines whether an
instrument can accurately measure a previously
known outcome or behavior.
CONTENT VALIDITY
Content validity evaluates how well an
instrument (like a test) covers all
relevant parts of the construct it aims
to measure. Here, a construct is a
theoretical concept, theme, or idea: in
particular, one that cannot usually be
measured directly.
CONSTRUCT VALIDITY
Construct validity concerns the extent to
which your test or measure accurately
assesses what it's supposed to. In
research, it's important to operationalize
constructs into concrete and measurable
characteristics based on your idea of the
construct and its dimensions.
CRITERION VALIDITY
Criterion validity (or criterion-
related validity) evaluates how
accurately a test measures the
outcome it was designed to
measure. An outcome can be a
disease, behavior, or performance.
RELIABILITY
Reliability relates to the extent to which the
instrument is consistent. The instrument
should be able to obtain approximately the
same response when applied to respondents
who are similarly situated. Likewise, when
the instrument is applied at two different
points in time, the responses must highly
correlate with one another.
RELIABILITY
Hence, reliability can be measured by
correlating the responses of subjects
exposed to the instrument at two
different time periods or by correlating
the responses of the subjects who are
similarly situated.
ATTRIBUTES DESCRIPTION
INTERNAL The extent to which all the items
CONSISTENCY OR on a scale measure one
HOMOGENEITY construct
STABILITY OR The consistency of results using
TEST/RETEST an instrument with repeated
CORRELATION testing
Consistency among responses of
multiple users of an instrument,
EQUIVALENCE
or among alternate forms of an
instrument
Attributes of Reliability in
Quantitative Research
1. Internal consistency or homogeneity – is when an
instrument measures a specific concept. This concept
is through questions or indicators and each question
must correlate highly with the total for this dimension.
a. Split-half correlation. We could split the index of “exposure
to televised news” in half so that there are two groups of
two questions, and see if the two sub-scales are highly
correlated. That is, do people who score high on the first
half also score high on the second half
Attributes of Reliability in
Quantitative Research
b. Average inter-item correlation. We can also determine
the internal consistency for each question on the index.
If the index is homogeneous, each question should be
highly correlated with the other three questions
c. Average item-total correlation. We can correlate each
question with the total score of the TV news exposure
index to examine the internal consistency of items.
This gives us an idea of the contribution of each item
to the reliability of the index.
Attributes of Reliability in
Quantitative Research
2. Stability or test-retest correlation – this is an
aspect of reliability where many researchers report
a highly reliable test indicates that the test is
stable over time. Test-retest correlation provides
an indication of stability over time. It is an extent
to which scores on a test are essentially invariant
over time. This definition clearly focuses on the
measurement instrument and the obtained test
scores in terms of test-retest stability
Attributes of Reliability in
Quantitative Research
3. Equivalence – Equivalence reliability is measured
by the correlation of scores between different
versions of the same instrument, or between
instruments that measure the same or similar
constructs, such that one instrument can be
reproduced by the other. If we want to know the
extent to which different investigators use the
same instrument to measure the same individuals
at the same time yield consistent results.
Attributes of Reliability in
Quantitative Research
3. Equivalence – Equivalence may also be estimated
by measuring the same concepts with different
instruments, for example, survey questionnaire
and official records, on the same sample, which is
known as multiple-forms reliability.
When you gather data, consider readability of
the instrument. Readability refers to the level of
difficulty of the instrument relative to the intended
users.
A valid instrument is always
reliable but a reliable
instrument is not always
valid.