Convergent validity is a subtype ofconstruct validitythat evaluates the extent to which responses on a test or instrument exhibit a strong relationship with responses on conceptually similar tests or instruments. Not only should a construct correlate with related variables, but it should not correlate with dissimilar and unrelated ones.
Key TakeawaysConvergent validity is the degree to which two measures of constructs that theoretically should be related, are in fact relatedThese measures can be different methods (e.g., self-report questionnaires and behavioral observations) or different instruments designed to measure the same construct.High positive correlations (generally above 0.5) between measures of the same construct indicate convergent validity.Convergent validity is often assessed alongsidediscriminant validity, which checks whether measures of constructs that shouldn’t be related are indeed not related.
Key Takeaways
Examples of Convergent Validity
Depression Questionnaires
If a psychologist is attempting to measure depression among a population using two different tests, they can examine how closely related the responses from those tests are to one another.
If they find that the results from both tests correlate strongly with one another, then convergent validity has been established; however, if there is no significant correlation between test results, then further investigation into why this lack of correspondence exists may be necessary (Krefetz et al., 2002).
IQ Tests
For example, if a person is given an IQ test and then subsequently completes a test of verbal skills, researchers can compare the results of both tests to determine whether there is a correlation between the two sets of results.
This type of comparison helps to show that the IQ test is measuring what it purports to measure – intelligence, thus helping to establish construct validity.
Measuring Extroversion
Imagine a study designed to assessextroversion. The researchers use three different methods to collect data:
If these three methods yield scores that are highly correlated, it would be evidence for the convergent validity of the extroversion measures.
How to measure convergent validity
Convergent validity is a matter of degree, not an all-or-none phenomenon. Convergent validity is also not a one-time determination.
Rather, it is an ongoing process that should be continually reevaluated as new information becomes available
Convergent validity can be measured using several statistical methods. The most common approaches are:
Correlation coefficients
The most common method for assessing convergent validity is calculating the correlation coefficient between scores from different measures hypothesized to assess the same construct.
To establish convergent validity, researchers typically set a threshold for the correlation coefficients or factor loadings.
The exact threshold may vary depending on the field and the nature of the constructs being measured, but values above 0.5 are generally considered acceptable.
Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r) is used when both measures are continuous andnormally distributed.
Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient (ρ) is used when the measures are ordinal or when the assumptions of Pearson’s correlation are not met.
While a high correlation is a positive indicator, it’s crucial to remember that it doesn’t guarantee the measures are accurately assessing the intended construct.
It’s possible they could be measuring a different, shared construct.
Factor analysis
Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) can be used to identify the underlying factor structure of a set of measures.
Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) can be used to test whether the measures load onto the expected factors based on theory.
High factor loadings (generally above 0.5) of the measures on the same factor suggest convergent validity.
Structural Equation Modeling (SEM)
SEM is a more advanced technique that combines factor analysis and regression analysis.
It allows for the simultaneous assessment of convergent validity, discriminant validity, and other types of validity.
High factor loadings and low cross-loadings in SEM support convergent validity.
Multitrait-Multimethod Matrix (MTMM)
Convergent validity is supported when the correlations between measures of the same trait using different methods are high.
These correlations are expected to be weaker than the monotrait-heteromethod correlations.
It’s important to note that assessing convergent validity is just one part of the validation process. Researchers should also consider other types of validity, such as content validity, criterion validity, and discriminant validity, to gain a comprehensive understanding of a measure’s psychometric properties.
FAQs
Is convergent validity internal or external?Convergent validity is an example ofexternal validity,as it is concerned with the degree to which different measures of a given construct are associated.This determines generalizability, applicability to practical situations in the world at large, and whether the results of the measure can be translated into other contexts.
Is convergent validity internal or external?
Convergent validity is an example ofexternal validity,as it is concerned with the degree to which different measures of a given construct are associated.This determines generalizability, applicability to practical situations in the world at large, and whether the results of the measure can be translated into other contexts.
Convergent validity is an example ofexternal validity,as it is concerned with the degree to which different measures of a given construct are associated.
This determines generalizability, applicability to practical situations in the world at large, and whether the results of the measure can be translated into other contexts.
What is the difference between convergent and discriminant validity?
A high score on the coding test should not correlate strongly with the scores of an IQ test, as this would just make the coding test another IQ test.
Convergent validity, on the other hand, indicates that a test correlates with a well-established test’s measures of the same construct. Both discriminant and convergent validity are important for measuring construct validity (Hubley & Zumbo, 2013).
What is the difference between convergent and divergent validity?
Thus, the same differences exist between convergent and divergent validity and convergent and discriminant validity.
American Psychological Association. (2010). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/education/k12/testing-standards.pdf
Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests.psychometrika,16(3), 297-334.
Firmin, Michael W., et al. “Evaluating the concurrent validity of three web-based IQ tests and the Reynolds Intellectual Assessment Scales (RIAS).”Eastern Education Journal37.1 (2008): 20.
Hubley, A. M., & Zumbo, B. D. (2013). Psychometric characteristics of assessment procedures: An overview.
Krabbe, E. C. W. (2017). Validity in quantitative research: A practical guide to interpreting validity coefficients in scientific studies. Routledge Academic US Division: New York, NY 10017 USA. doi: 10.4324/9781315677620
Krefetz, D. G., Steer, R. A., Gulab, N. A., & Beck, A. T. (2002). Convergent validity of the Beck Depression Inventory-II with the Reynolds Adolescent Depression Scale in psychiatric inpatients.Journal of Personality Assessment,78(3), 451-460.
MacDonald III, A. W., Goghari, V. M., Hicks, B. M., Flory, J. D., Carter, C. S., & Manuck, S. B. (2005). A convergent-divergent approach to context processing, general intellectual functioning, and the genetic liability to schizophrenia.Neuropsychology,19(6), 814.
Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994).
Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Poole, K. T., & Rosenthal, H. (1991). Patterns of congressional voting.American journal of political science, 228-278.
Saul McLeod, PhD
BSc (Hons) Psychology, MRes, PhD, University of Manchester
Saul McLeod, PhD., is a qualified psychology teacher with over 18 years of experience in further and higher education. He has been published in peer-reviewed journals, including the Journal of Clinical Psychology.
Olivia Guy-Evans, MSc
BSc (Hons) Psychology, MSc Psychology of Education
Olivia Guy-Evans is a writer and associate editor for Simply Psychology. She has previously worked in healthcare and educational sectors.
Charlotte NickersonResearch Assistant at Harvard UniversityUndergraduate at Harvard UniversityCharlotte Nickerson is a student at Harvard University obsessed with the intersection of mental health, productivity, and design.
Charlotte NickersonResearch Assistant at Harvard UniversityUndergraduate at Harvard University
Charlotte Nickerson
Research Assistant at Harvard University
Undergraduate at Harvard University
Charlotte Nickerson is a student at Harvard University obsessed with the intersection of mental health, productivity, and design.
