MKT503 –MARKETING MANAGEMENT
Lecture-5
MGN832
Business Research
Methods
Validity and Reliability
Learning Outcomes
• Understanding the concepts of validity and
reliability
• Developing skill to execute good measurement
scales
Learning Outcome
Polling
Q1. Which scale is used to measure the behavioral
response-
a.Nominal
b.Ordinal
c.Interval
d.ratio
Q2. Identify the scale for below mentioned question-
Question- What is your monthly average electricity bill
during winter in Rs.-
a.3000-5000 rs
b.5000-8000 rs
c.8000-10000 rs
d.> 10000 rs
Question for discussion- Can we ask the
same question by using two different
measurement scales?
Yes or No
Type Question1 - What is your monthly average
electricity bill during winter in Rs.-
a.3000-5000 rs
b.5000-8000 rs
c.8000-10000 rs
d.> 10000 rs
Type Question2 - What is your monthly average
electricity bill during winter in Rs………………..
The Criteria for Good Measurement
1. Validity
In fact, validity is the ability of an instrument to measure what is designed to
measure.
It sounds simple that a measure should measure what it is supposed to measure
but has a great deal of difficulty in real life.
Difference Between Variable and Construct
Sales------------------- Motivation
Sales- Variable
Motivation- Construct
Variable and Construct
1(a) Content Validity
The content validation includes careful specification
of constructs, review of scaling procedures
consultation with experts (Vogt et al., 2004).
It is also called the face validity.
In fact, the content validity is a subjective
evaluation of the scale for its ability to measure
what it is supposed to measure.
1(b) Criterion Validity
1(c) Construct Validity
The construct validity is the initial concept, notion, question, or hypothesis that
determines which data are to be generated and how they are to be gathered (Golafshani,
2003).
To achieve the construct validity, the researcher must focus on convergent validity and
discriminant validity.
The convergent validity is established when the new measure correlates or converges
with other similar measures.
The literal meaning of correlation or convergence specifically indicates the degree to
which the score on one measuring instrument (scale) is correlated with other measuring
instrument (scale) developed to measure the same constructs.
Discriminant validity
Discriminant validity is established when a new measuring instrument has low
correlation or nonconvergence with the measures of dissimilar concept.
The literal meaning of no correlation or non-convergence specifically indicates the
degree to which the score on one measuring instrument (scale) is not correlated
with the other measuring instrument (scale) developed to measure the different
constructs.
To establish the construct validity, a researcher has to establish the convergent
validity and discriminant validity.
2. Reliability
Reliability is the tendency of a respondent to respond in the same or in a similar
manner to an identical or a near identical question (Burns & Bush, 1999).
A measure is said to be reliable when it elicits the same response from the same
person when the measuring instrument is administered to that person successively
in similar or almost similar circumstances.
Reliable measuring instruments provide confidence to a researcher that the
transient and situational factors are not intervening in the process, and hence, the
measuring instrument is robust.
A researcher can adopt three ways to handle the issue of reliability: test–retest
reliability, equivalent forms reliability, and internal consistency reliability.
2(a) Test–Retest Reliability
To execute the test–retest reliability, the same questionnaire is administered to the
same respondents to elicit responses in two different time slots.
As a next step, the degree of similarity between the two sets of responses is determined.
To assess the degree of similarity between the two sets of responses, correlation
coefficient is computed. Higher correlation coefficient indicates a higher reliable
measuring instrument, and lower correlation coefficient indicates an unreliable
measuring instrument.
2(b) Equivalent Forms Reliability
In test–retest reliability, a researcher considers personal and situation
fluctuation in responses in two different time periods, whereas in the case of
considering equivalent forms reliability, two equivalent forms are administered to
the subjects at two different times.
To measure the desired characteristics of interest, two equivalent forms are
constructed with different sample of items. Both the forms contain the same type of
questions and the same structure with some specific difference.
2(c) Internal Consistency Reliability
The internal consistency reliability is used to assess the reliability of a summated
scale by which several items are summed to form a total score (Malhotra, 2004).
The basic approach to measure the internal consistency reliability is split-half technique.
In this technique, the items are divided into equivalent groups. This division is done on the
basis of some predefined aspects as odd versus even number questions in the
questionnaire or split of items randomly.
After division, responses on items are correlated. High correlation coefficient indicates high
internal consistency, and low correlation coefficient indicates low internal consistency.
Subjectivity in the process of splitting the items into two parts poses some common
problems for the researchers.
A very common approach to deal with this problem is coefficient alpha or Cronbach’s
alpha.
The Coefficient Alpha or
Cronbach’s Alpha
The coefficient alpha or Cronbach’s alpha is actually a mean reliability coefficient
for all the different ways of splitting the items included in the measuring
instruments.
As different from correlation coefficient, coefficient alpha varies from 0 to 1, and a
coefficient value of 0.6 or less is considered to be unsatisfactory.
