Validity presents two factors of concern for media psychologists. Methodological validity is the likelihood that a particular approach can answer a research question accurately and thoroughly. It is a factor in the design of both qualitative and quantitative research studies, although distinct criteria for its establishment exist within each approach (i.e., credibility and transferability for qualitative researchers; internal and external validity for quantitative researchers). Measurement validity is the degree to which measures accurately capture the concept a researcher proposes to observe. This factor is represented through a variety of dimensions, some primarily established through logic (i.e., face, content, criterion, and nomological validity) and others additionally through statistical analyses (i.e., convergent, discriminant, concurrent, and predictive validity).

Validity refers to two separate areas of concern in communication research. The first of those areas is the extent to which a measure reflects its intended concept. The term is distinct from reliability, although if a measure is valid this assumes that the measure is also reliable. Three established dimensions of validity exist: content , criterion , and construct validity . Statistical techniques such as confirmatory factor analysis and multitrait‐multimethod modeling can provide empirical evidence of validity. The second area in which scholars may consider issues related to validity is in experimental design. Experimental validity consists of two components, internal validity and external validity . Unlike measurement validity, experimental validity relies on logic, delineation, and establishment of cause‐and‐effect relationships.