Measuring subjective outcomes

Abstract

Reliability and validity are criteria used to assess metric adequacy and are typically quantified by correlation coefficients. Reliability is described as the extent to which repeated measurements yield consistent results. Validity is described as the extent to which a measure actually measures what it purports to measure. These conceptualizations are less useful when applied to measures of subjective outcomes because they do not convey other influences that "drive" correlation coefficients. Consistency is a manifestation of a reliable instrument but does not ensure that an instrument is reliable. Establishing the validity of an instrument is a complex process that is heavily dependent on an investigator's hypothesis. Hence, validity coefficients may be more a reflection of hypothesis adequacy than of the extent to which instruments measure what they purport to measure. Appreciating how coefficients are influenced will better enable clinicians to assess the adequacy of subjective outcome measures.

Internal Consistency and Convergent Validity of the Klontz Money Behavior Inventory (KMBI)

“…The KMBI was developed using factor analysis, and subscales have now demonstrated strong internal consistency reliability after two separate studies. Recognizing that reliability is a necessary but insufficient requirement for validity (Elasy & Gaddy, 1998), the present study sought to further establish the technical adequacy of the KMBI through examining its convergence with similar measures.…”

Investigating Construct Validity of the Cyber-Peer Experiences Questionnaire

“…A second way of visualizing this concept is to consider a situation where a research is hitting across all rings of the bulls-eye so that the "average" measurement was near the center of the rings. Although possible, it is likely that any one measurement point the researcher made will vary in a random way and is thus not the preferred method for establishing valid measurement (Elasy & Gaddy, 1998).…”

Development and psychometric properties of the Malaysian elder abuse scale

“…Criterion Validity (Predictive Validity): Validity has been defined as the extent to which a scale actually measures what it is intended to measure [28]. Criterion validity is a method of validity, which relies on comparison between the proposed measure and a measure previously developed to measure the variable of interest [29].…”