Inter-rater reliability can be used for interviews. Note, it can also be called inter-observer reliability when referring to observational research. Here researcher when observe the same behavior independently to avoided bias and compare their data. If the data is similar then it is reliable. In this scenario it would be unlikely they would record aggressive behavior the same and the data would be unreliable. However, if they were to operationalize the behavior category of aggression this would be more objective and make it easier to identify when a specific behavior occurs.
Thus researchers could simply count how many times children push each other over a certain duration of time. Manual for the beck depression inventory The Psychological Corporation. San Antonio , TX. Manual for the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory. Saul McLeod , published The term reliability in psychological research refers to the consistency of a research study or measuring test.
There are two types of reliability — internal and external reliability. Assessing Reliability Split-half method The split-half method assesses the internal consistency of a test, such as psychometric tests and questionnaires.
Test-retest The test-retest method assesses the external consistency of a test. Inter-rater reliability The test-retest method assesses the external consistency of a test. Where observer scores do not significantly correlate then reliability can be improved by: Training observers in the observation techniques being used and making sure everyone agrees with them.
Or log in with Leave this field blank: Search over articles on psychology, science, and experiments. Reasoning Philosophy Ethics History. Psychology Biology Physics Medicine Anthropology. Share this page on your website: This article is a part of the guide: Select from one of the other courses available: Don't miss these related articles:.
Back to Overview "Validity and Reliability". Related articles Related pages: Want to stay up to date? Save this course for later Don't have time for it all now? No problem, save it as a course and come back to it later. Add to my courses. The Research Council of Norway. We often think of reliability and validity as separate ideas but, in fact, they're related to each other. Here, I want to show you two ways you can think about their relationship. One of my favorite metaphors for the relationship between reliability is that of the target.
Think of the center of the target as the concept that you are trying to measure. Imagine that for each person you are measuring, you are taking a shot at the target. If you measure the concept perfectly for a person, you are hitting the center of the target. If you don't, you are missing the center.
The more you are off for that person, the further you are from the center. The figure above shows four possible situations. In the first one, you are hitting the target consistently, but you are missing the center of the target.
That is, you are consistently and systematically measuring the wrong value for all respondents. This measure is reliable, but no valid that is, it's consistent but wrong. The second, shows hits that are randomly spread across the target.
You seldom hit the center of the target but, on average, you are getting the right answer for the group but not very well for individuals.
Validity encompasses the entire experimental concept and establishes whether the results obtained meet all of the requirements of the scientific research method. For example, there must have been randomization of the sample groups and appropriate care and diligence shown in .
Issues of research reliability and validity need to be addressed in methodology chapter in a concise manner. Reliability refers to the extent to which the same answers can be obtained using the same instruments more than one time.
Construct validity is the term given to a test that measures a construct accurately and there are different types of construct validity that we should be concerned with. Three of these, concurrent validity, content validity, and predictive validity are discussed below. Concurrent Validity. On one end is the situation where the concepts and methods of measurement are the same (reliability) and on the other is the situation where concepts and methods of measurement are different (very discriminant validity).
Define reliability, including the different types and how they are assessed. Define validity, including the different types and how they are assessed. Describe the kinds of evidence that would be relevant to assessing the reliability and validity of a particular measure. Different methods vary with regard to these two aspects of validity. Experiments, because they tend to be structured and controlled, are often high on internal validity. In contrast, observational research may have high external validity (generalizability) because it has taken place in the real world. Relationship between reliability.