Validity in Psychological Tests

Table of ContentsView AllTable of ContentsContent ValidityCriterion-Related ValidityConstruct ValidityFace ValidityReliability vs. ValidityFrequently Asked Questions

Table of ContentsView All

View All

Table of Contents

Content Validity

Criterion-Related Validity

Construct Validity

Face Validity

Reliability vs. Validity

Frequently Asked Questions

Close

Validity is the extent to which a test measures what it claims to measure.It is vital for a test to be valid in order for the results to be accurately applied and interpreted.

Psychological assessment is an important part of both experimental research and clinical treatment. One of the greatest concerns when creating a psychological test is whether or not it actually measures what we think it is measuring.

This article discusses what each of these four types of validity is and how they are used in psychological tests. It also explores how validity compares with reliability, which is another important measure of a test’s accuracy and usefulness.

When a test has content validity, the items on the test represent the entire range of possible items the test should cover.Individual test questions may be drawn from a large pool of items that cover a broad range of topics.

Internal and External ValidityInternal and external validityare used to determine whether or not the results of an experiment are meaningful. Internal validity relates to the way a test is performed, while external validity examines how well the findings may apply in other settings.

Internal and External Validity

Internal and external validityare used to determine whether or not the results of an experiment are meaningful. Internal validity relates to the way a test is performed, while external validity examines how well the findings may apply in other settings.

A test is said to have criterion-related validity when it has demonstrated its effectiveness in predicting criteria, or indicators, of a construct.

For example, when an employer hires new employees, they will examine different criteria that could predict whether or not a prospective hire will be a good fit for a job. People who do well on a test may be more likely to do well at a job, while people with a low score on a test will do poorly at that job.

There are two different types of criterion validity: concurrent and predictive.

Concurrent Validity

Predictive Validity

Predictive validity is when the criterion measures are obtained at a time after the test.Examples of tests with predictive validity are career oraptitude tests, which are helpful in determining who is likely to succeed or fail in certain subjects or occupations.

A test has construct validity if it demonstrates an association between the test scores and the prediction of a theoretical trait.Intelligence tests are one example of measurement instruments that should have construct validity. A valid intelligence test should be able to accurately measure the construct ofintelligencerather than other characteristics, such as memory or education level.

Essentially, construct validity looks at whether a test covers the full range of behaviors that make up the construct being measured. The procedure here is to identify necessary tasks to perform a job like typing, design, or physical ability.

In order to demonstrate the construct validity of a selection procedure, the behaviors demonstrated in the selection should be arepresentative sampleof the behaviors of the job.

Obviously, face validity only means that the testlookslike it works. It does not mean that the test has been proven to work. However, if the measure seems to be valid at this point, researchers may investigate further in order to determine whether the test is valid and should be used in the future.

A survey asking people which political candidate they plan to vote for would be said to have high face validity, while a complex test used as part of apsychological experimentthat looks at a variety of values, characteristics, and behaviors might be said to have low face validity because the exact purpose of the test is not immediately clear, particularly to the participants.

While validity examines how well a test measures what it is intended to measure,reliabilityrefers to howconsistentthe results are. There are four ways to assess reliability:

It’s important to remember that a test can be reliable without being valid. Consistent results do not always indicate that a test is measuring what researchers designed it to.

External validity is how well the results of a test apply in other settings. The findings of a test with strong external validity will apply to practical situations and take real-world variables into account.

Internal validity examines the procedures and structure of a test to determine how well it was conducted and whether or not its results are valid. A test with strong internal validity willestablish cause and effectand should eliminate alternative explanations for the findings.

Reliability is an examination of how consistent and stable the results of an assessment are. Validity refers to how well a test actually measures what it was created to measure. Reliability measures the precision of a test, while validity looks at accuracy.

An example of reliability in psychology research would be administering a personality test multiple times in a row to see if the person has the same result. If the score is the same or similar on each test, it is an indicator that the test is reliable.

Understanding Methods for Research in Psychology

9 SourcesVerywell Mind uses only high-quality sources, including peer-reviewed studies, to support the facts within our articles. Read oureditorial processto learn more about how we fact-check and keep our content accurate, reliable, and trustworthy.Newton PE, Shaw SD.Standards for talking and thinking about validity.Psychol Methods. 2013;18(3):301-19. doi:10.1037/a0032969Cizek GJ.Defining and distinguishing validity: Interpretations of score meaning and justifications of test use.Psychol Methods. 2012;17(1):31-43. doi:10.1037/a0026975Committee on Psychological Testing, Including Validity Testing, for Social Security Administration Disability Determinations; Board on the Health of Select Populations; Institute of Medicine.Psychological Testing in the Service of Disability Determination. Washington, DC; 2015.Lin WL., Yao G.Criterion validity. In: Michalos AC, ed.Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research. Springer, Dordrecht; 2014. doi:10.1007/978-94-007-0753-5_618Lin WL., Yao G.Concurrent validity. In: Michalos AC, ed.Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research. Springer, Dordrecht; 2014. doi:10.1007/978-94-007-0753-5_516Lin WL., Yao G.Predictive validity. In: Michalos AC, eds.Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research. Springer, Dordrecht; 2014. doi:10.1007/978-94-007-0753-5_2241Ginty AT.Construct validity. In: Gellman MD, Turner JR, eds.Encyclopedia of Behavioral Medicine. Springer, New York, NY; 2013. doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-1005-9_861Johnson E.Face validity. In: Volkmar FR, ed.Encyclopedia of Autism Spectrum Disorders. Springer, New York, NY; 2013. doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-1698-3_308Almanasreh E, Moles R, Chen TF.Evaluation of methods used for estimating content validity.Res Social Adm Pharm. 2019;15(2):214-221. doi:10.1016/j.sapharm.2018.03.066

9 Sources

Verywell Mind uses only high-quality sources, including peer-reviewed studies, to support the facts within our articles. Read oureditorial processto learn more about how we fact-check and keep our content accurate, reliable, and trustworthy.Newton PE, Shaw SD.Standards for talking and thinking about validity.Psychol Methods. 2013;18(3):301-19. doi:10.1037/a0032969Cizek GJ.Defining and distinguishing validity: Interpretations of score meaning and justifications of test use.Psychol Methods. 2012;17(1):31-43. doi:10.1037/a0026975Committee on Psychological Testing, Including Validity Testing, for Social Security Administration Disability Determinations; Board on the Health of Select Populations; Institute of Medicine.Psychological Testing in the Service of Disability Determination. Washington, DC; 2015.Lin WL., Yao G.Criterion validity. In: Michalos AC, ed.Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research. Springer, Dordrecht; 2014. doi:10.1007/978-94-007-0753-5_618Lin WL., Yao G.Concurrent validity. In: Michalos AC, ed.Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research. Springer, Dordrecht; 2014. doi:10.1007/978-94-007-0753-5_516Lin WL., Yao G.Predictive validity. In: Michalos AC, eds.Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research. Springer, Dordrecht; 2014. doi:10.1007/978-94-007-0753-5_2241Ginty AT.Construct validity. In: Gellman MD, Turner JR, eds.Encyclopedia of Behavioral Medicine. Springer, New York, NY; 2013. doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-1005-9_861Johnson E.Face validity. In: Volkmar FR, ed.Encyclopedia of Autism Spectrum Disorders. Springer, New York, NY; 2013. doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-1698-3_308Almanasreh E, Moles R, Chen TF.Evaluation of methods used for estimating content validity.Res Social Adm Pharm. 2019;15(2):214-221. doi:10.1016/j.sapharm.2018.03.066

Verywell Mind uses only high-quality sources, including peer-reviewed studies, to support the facts within our articles. Read oureditorial processto learn more about how we fact-check and keep our content accurate, reliable, and trustworthy.

Newton PE, Shaw SD.Standards for talking and thinking about validity.Psychol Methods. 2013;18(3):301-19. doi:10.1037/a0032969Cizek GJ.Defining and distinguishing validity: Interpretations of score meaning and justifications of test use.Psychol Methods. 2012;17(1):31-43. doi:10.1037/a0026975Committee on Psychological Testing, Including Validity Testing, for Social Security Administration Disability Determinations; Board on the Health of Select Populations; Institute of Medicine.Psychological Testing in the Service of Disability Determination. Washington, DC; 2015.Lin WL., Yao G.Criterion validity. In: Michalos AC, ed.Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research. Springer, Dordrecht; 2014. doi:10.1007/978-94-007-0753-5_618Lin WL., Yao G.Concurrent validity. In: Michalos AC, ed.Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research. Springer, Dordrecht; 2014. doi:10.1007/978-94-007-0753-5_516Lin WL., Yao G.Predictive validity. In: Michalos AC, eds.Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research. Springer, Dordrecht; 2014. doi:10.1007/978-94-007-0753-5_2241Ginty AT.Construct validity. In: Gellman MD, Turner JR, eds.Encyclopedia of Behavioral Medicine. Springer, New York, NY; 2013. doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-1005-9_861Johnson E.Face validity. In: Volkmar FR, ed.Encyclopedia of Autism Spectrum Disorders. Springer, New York, NY; 2013. doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-1698-3_308Almanasreh E, Moles R, Chen TF.Evaluation of methods used for estimating content validity.Res Social Adm Pharm. 2019;15(2):214-221. doi:10.1016/j.sapharm.2018.03.066

Newton PE, Shaw SD.Standards for talking and thinking about validity.Psychol Methods. 2013;18(3):301-19. doi:10.1037/a0032969

Cizek GJ.Defining and distinguishing validity: Interpretations of score meaning and justifications of test use.Psychol Methods. 2012;17(1):31-43. doi:10.1037/a0026975

Committee on Psychological Testing, Including Validity Testing, for Social Security Administration Disability Determinations; Board on the Health of Select Populations; Institute of Medicine.Psychological Testing in the Service of Disability Determination. Washington, DC; 2015.

Lin WL., Yao G.Criterion validity. In: Michalos AC, ed.Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research. Springer, Dordrecht; 2014. doi:10.1007/978-94-007-0753-5_618

Lin WL., Yao G.Concurrent validity. In: Michalos AC, ed.Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research. Springer, Dordrecht; 2014. doi:10.1007/978-94-007-0753-5_516

Lin WL., Yao G.Predictive validity. In: Michalos AC, eds.Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research. Springer, Dordrecht; 2014. doi:10.1007/978-94-007-0753-5_2241

Ginty AT.Construct validity. In: Gellman MD, Turner JR, eds.Encyclopedia of Behavioral Medicine. Springer, New York, NY; 2013. doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-1005-9_861

Johnson E.Face validity. In: Volkmar FR, ed.Encyclopedia of Autism Spectrum Disorders. Springer, New York, NY; 2013. doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-1698-3_308

Almanasreh E, Moles R, Chen TF.Evaluation of methods used for estimating content validity.Res Social Adm Pharm. 2019;15(2):214-221. doi:10.1016/j.sapharm.2018.03.066

Meet Our Review Board

Share Feedback

Was this page helpful?Thanks for your feedback!What is your feedback?HelpfulReport an ErrorOtherSubmit

Was this page helpful?

Thanks for your feedback!

What is your feedback?HelpfulReport an ErrorOtherSubmit

What is your feedback?