Two Types Of Validity Paper

Compare and Contrast Two Types of Validity The first measure to be examined is face validity which evaluates the extent that a measure appears to be valid to the group that the instrument is administered. One example, would be using a depression scale, “we would expect it to contain items about sadness, suicidal thoughts, grief, crying spells, and lack of energy. However, if the scale included items that asked about our hair color, favorite flavor of ice cream, and feelings regarding cats, it would not make sense on the face of it” (Krysik & Finn, 2013, p.262). As a result, the scale for depression would not be taken seriously as a measure of depression and the negative feelings could affect the way we answer the questions. In contrast, construct validity measures the way other variables are related within a system. “Basically, construct validity implies that the developers of standardized instruments form hypothesis
For instance, the concept of elder abuse can differ substantially from one culture to another. Items that measure elder abuse in one culture may be interpreted differently to another” (Krysik & Finn, 2013, p.262). As a result, the differences in culture could affect the outcomes such as understanding the questions and the willingness to cooperate. Face validity is easy to apply and because the measure can be done in a simple manner it saves time. However, some researchers consider face validity not to be a true form “because it is concerned only with whether the instrument appears to measure what it purports to measure. Face validity cannot determine whether the instrument is actually measuring the concept” (Krysik & Finn, 2013, p.262). As a result, since it cannot be determined if the instrument is measuring the concept it could interfere with the result because outside factors might be the