This is due to the fact that you can never fully demonstrate a ‘construct’. In truth, the studies’ results don’t really ‘validate’ or ‘prove’ the whole theory. In this sense, the validation process is in continuous reformulation and refinement.

Taking into account the gathered data, they decide whether the theory adequately explains the results. If that isn’t the case, they review the theory and repeat the process until they get a more accurate explanation.

Next, they gather data that confirms or denies those hypotheses.

Based on the theory held at the time of the test, the psychologist deducts certain hypotheses about the expected behavior of people who get different test scores.

There are several procedures to establish construct validity (1): Procedure to establish construct validity Then, the examination of the degree to which the data could be explained by alternative hypotheses.

The establishment of consistency between the data and hypothesis.

Selection of items or tests (indicators) that represent concrete manifestations of the construct.

Formulation of hypotheses and relationships between construct elements, other construct theories, and other external constructs.

The construct validation process involves (1): Therefore, construct validity consists of obtaining evidence to support whether the observed behaviors in a test are (some) indicators of the construct (1). This type of validity answers the question: “How can the test score be explained psychologically?” The answer to this question can be thought of as elaborating a ‘mini-theory’ about the psychological test. Construct validityĬonstruct is a hypothetical concept that’s a part of the theories that try to explain human behavior. For example, intelligence and creativity. However, the main problem with this type of validity is that it’s difficult to find tests that serve as valid and reliable criteria. For example, a collective intelligence test could be similar to an individual intelligence test. Concurrent validity’s main use is to find tests that can substitute other procedures that are less convenient for various reasons.

The main purposes of predictive validity and concurrent validity are different.

In concurrent validity, the test-makers obtain the test measurements and the criteria at the same time.

However, there are two main differences between these two validities (1): This type of validity is similar to predictive validity. The criteria are measuring instruments that the test-makers previously evaluated. In order to estimate this type of validity, test-makers administer the test and correlate it with the criteria. Concurrent validity refers to whether a test’s scores actually evaluate the test’s questions.

Types of validity and reliability