When you weigh a bag of chips on multiple scales, you would expect the same result, regardless of how many scales you use. Well, that’s what convergence validity does, it examines how well different measures of the same concept agree.
Let’s say you want to measure customer satisfaction with your new product, you could ask them “How satisfied are you with product A?” Then you check the convergent validity of this question by asking them another satisfaction question, such as “How likely are you to recommend our products to a friend?”
If you get similar responses, then you are sure your survey questions are truly measuring satisfaction. Let’s take a deep dive into convergence validity, its importance, and how you use it to improve your research.
Invalid measures lead to misleading findings and inaccurate conclusions, which has several negative consequences including:
Getting very similar results using different approaches confirms the accuracy of your research results and establishes a solid method for future research. As a result, other researchers can use your methods when performing similar research in the future.
Inter-rater agreement and reliability measures allow you to assess convergent validity when the construct of interest is being rated by multiple people. Let’s say you want to measure teacher effectiveness you can have multiple raters (e.g., administrators, supervisors, and peers) rate each teacher’s performance.
If the ratings of the different raters are highly correlated with each other, then this provides evidence that the measure has good convergent validity. You can also use statistical techniques to measure the relationship between different rating scales using Cohen’s kappa, the Krippendorff alpha, or the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).
Another way to assess convergent validity is to use multiple measurement tools and sources to measure the same construct. For example, you can use self-report and observational measures to measure anxiety triggers.
If the results of these two different types of measures correlate with each other, then this provides evidence that they are both measuring the same thing (i.e., anxiety triggers)
Pilot tests and pre-validation checks help you to identify any potential problems with the measure, such as low convergent validity.
For example, you can pilot-test a new measure of anxiety on a small sample of participants. If the measure does not have good convergent validity in the pilot test, then you can revise the measure before using it in a larger study.
Convergent and discriminant validity are two sides of the same coin-construct validity. Construct validity is the degree to which a measure measures what it is intended to measure.
Convergent validity assesses the degree to which two or more measures of the same construct correlate. Discriminant validity assesses the degree to which two or more measures of different constructs do not correlate with each other.
In simpler terms, convergent validity focuses on similarities, while discriminant validity focuses on differences. So, a good measure should have high convergent validity and low discriminant validity.
Here is an example:
If the two measures of anxiety correlate highly with each other, then this provides evidence that they are both measuring the same thing (i.e., anxiety). This demonstrates convergent validity.
But if the measures of anxiety do not correlate with each other, then it shows discriminant validity.
Convergent validity assesses the degree to which two or more measures of the same construct correlate with each other. Criterion validity assesses the degree to which a measure correlates with an external criterion.
An external criterion is a measure of a different construct that is known to be related to the construct of interest. For example, if you are developing a new measure of anxiety, you could use a measure of depression as an external criterion.
If the new anxiety measure closely matches the depression measure, then this supports the validity of the new anxiety measure because depression is associated with anxiety.
However, it is important to note that criterion validity is not always possible or appropriate to assess. For example, there is no single gold standard measure of anxiety, so you still have to rely on convergent validity to assess the validity of your research.
Construct validity is the extent to which a measure measures what it is supposed to measure. Convergent validity, on the other hand, is a type of construct validity that looks at the relationships between different measures of the same construct.
Here is an example:
If the IQ test and the scholastic achievement test correlate highly with each other, then this provides evidence that they are both measuring the same thing (i.e., intelligence). This demonstrates convergent validity.
However, convergent validity is not a guarantee of construct validity. For example, two measures might correlate highly with each other, but they might both be measuring something other than the construct of interest.
Let’s say you designed a new questionnaire to measure anxiety in adults, you would establish the convergent validity of this measure by using an already established measure, e.g. high blood pressure.
If you see a strong correlation between the two measures- using blood pressure and the questionnaire; it shows there’s convergent validity in your new measure.
Let’s say you want to use an alternative IQ test to measure student intelligence to improve teaching methods. You would need a well-established method such as a standardized IQ to make sure the new measure measures what it should.
If you’re looking at acute pain symptoms and comparing them to the symptoms of someone who’s depressed, and your results do not match up. The fact that they don’t match up shows that they’re two different things.
Intelligence and creativity are not the same thing but people often use them to measure one another. Getting non-correlating results would prove the discriminant validity relationship between them.
Discriminant validity is a way to make sure that when we’re studying or measuring different things. Think of it as not expecting the same taste from apples and oranges, even though they are both fruits
Convergent and discriminant validity are often evaluated together because they provide complementary information about the validity of a measure. When a measure has high convergent and low discriminant validity, then you are sure the measure is measuring what it should.
There is no “right” answer to this question because the convergent validity score depends on the construct being measured and on the other measures used for comparison.
However, a general rule of thumb is having a convergent validity correlation of .50 or higher.
Yes, it is possible for a measure to have high internal consistency and high test-retest reliability, but low convergent validity. This typically happens when the measure is measuring something other than the construct of interest.
Internal consistency is the correlation between the items on the measure, while test-retest reliability is the consistency of a measure over time. Convergent validity is the correlation of a measure with other measures in the same construct.
As a result, a measure can have high internal consistency and high test-retest reliability without having good convergent validity. A measure can also have good convergent validity without having high internal consistency or high test-retest reliability.
The best statistics to determine convergent and discriminant construct validity depend on the type of data that is being collected and the specific research questions that are being asked.
The most common statistics used are the Pearson correlation coefficient, Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient, Point-biserial correlation coefficient, and Phi coefficient.
Start by collecting data from multiple measures of the same construct (for convergent validity) or multiple measures of different constructs (for discriminant validity).
Once you have collected the data, you can use the most suitable statistical methods listed above to calculate the correlation between the measures.
If the correlation between the measures is high, then this provides evidence of convergent or discriminant validity, depending on which type of validity you are assessing.
Convergent validity assesses the degree to which two or more measures of the same construct correlate with each other. This ensures that the results of the research are accurate and prevents misleading conclusions.
You can also use other methods like discrimination and criterion validity to complement the accuracy of your convergent validity results. We hope this guide helps you improve the quality of your research!
You may also like:
In this article, we’ll show you how to create different types of thesis statements plus examples you can learn from.
This article will take you through some of the types of explanatory research and what they are used for.
In this article, we will discuss the concept of internal validity, some clear examples, its importance, and how to test it.
Introduction Market research is a career that requires a variety of competencies in order to execute the job duties effectively. These...