Understanding the Impact of Convergent Validity on Research Results
Understanding the Impact of Convergent Validity on Research Results
复制标题
DOI：
10.1177/1094428110392383
复制
发表时间：
2012-01-01
影响因子：
9.5
通讯作者：
Herdman, Andrew O.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Carlson, Kevin D.;Herdman, Andrew O.
在研究中使用不同的结构测量来开发关系和影响的有力证据被视为良好的方法实践。这假设这些措施具有很高的收敛效度。然而，代理-相同结构的替代措施-很少完美收敛。虽然一些收敛是最好的，这项研究表明，即使是适度偏离完美的收敛效度可能会导致结果的幅度有很大的差异，创造了积累和解释的研究挑战。使用已发表研究的数据，作者发现，即使在r = 0.85的收敛效度水平上，使用期望变量和代理变量的研究结果也存在实质性差异。研究结果的可解释性的收敛效度不太理想的措施使用的影响进行检查。建议收敛效度高于r = .70，而应避免低于r = .50。鼓励研究人员开发和报告收敛效度数据。
Using different measures of constructs in research to develop robust evidence of relationships and effects is seen as good methodological practice. This assumes these measures possess high convergent validity. However, proxies-alternative measures of the same construct-are rarely perfectly convergent. Although some convergence is preferred to none, this study demonstrates that even modest departures from perfect convergent validity can result in substantial differences in the magnitudes of findings, creating challenges for the accumulation and interpretation of research. Using data from published research, the authors find that substantial differences in findings between studies using desired and proxy variables occur even at levels of convergent validity as high as r = .85. Implications of using measures with less-than-ideal convergent validity for the interpretability of research results are examined. Convergent validities above r = .70 are recommended, whereas those below r = .50 should be avoided. Researchers are encouraged to develop and report convergent validity data.