Respond to two or more of your colleagues’ postings in one or more of the following ways:Address the content of each colleague’s analysis and evaluation of the topic and of the integration of the
Post an explanation of the importance of psychometrically (reliability and validity) sound instruments to measure constructs within quantitative business research. In your explanation, do the following:
Describe the similarities and differences of reliability and validity within the context of quantitative business research.
Identify the instrument utilized in your chosen article, including relevant details such as requirements or tools.
Discuss the concepts of the instrument’s measurements and their psychometric properties.
Explain why or why not you would use this instrument in your own DBA Doctoral Study, providing support based upon your assessment of its psychometric properties.
Be sure to support your work with a minimum of two specific citations from this week’s Learning Resources and at least one additional scholarly source.
Dwight
Validity vs. Reliability
The term validity in quantitative research is defined as relevant for the specific research topic. Reliability is defined as if the research method of the data can be recreated again and again with the same or similar outcome. Both terms are of equal importance when conducting research.
The Instrument
The Human Resource Development (HRD) climate survey instrument is used to evaluate the HRD climate of an organization (Chaudhary, Rangnekar, & Barua, 2013). The survey consists of a 38 question, questionnaire that is graded on 5-point scale (Chaudhary, Rangnekar, & Barua, 2013).
Psychometric Properties
The psychometric properties of the HRD climate survey instrument are flawed. The survey accounts for only three factors in HRD (Chaudhary, Rangnekar, & Barua, 2013). Thus, the instrument is insufficient in properly evaluating HRD climate. As a result, this instrument is not appropriate to use in a Walden DBA study. A better instrument is the six factor correlated model mentioned in the study. The six-factor model accurately captures six factors of HRD, Top Management Belief; Employee Development; Autonomy, Openness & Authenticity; Superior-Subordinate Relationship; Rewards, Performance & Potential Appraisal; and Trust Collaboration & Team Spirit (Chaudhary, Rangnekar, & Barua, 2013).
Mohammed
Describe the Similarities and Differences of Reliability and Validity within the Context of Quantitative Business Research
In the field of research, there is no one universal definition for quality research. However, all definitions focus on evaluating the worthiness and the rigor of the research. Different institutions and even different countries have their definition of quality research. Mårtensson, Fors, Wallin, Zander, and Nilsson (2016) worked on a quality framework and formulated a model constitutes of 32 concepts based on four main areas to describe research quality. The research can be classified as quality research if the research satisfies the criteria of those concepts. The four areas are credibility, contributory, communicable, and confirming. Moreover, among the quality concepts are rigorous, consistent, coherent, transparent, original, relevant, generalizable, consumable, accessible, searchable, ethical, and sustainable. Each concept has its definition and weight according to the research preferences.
Researchers determine different concepts of quality for qualitative and quantitative research. In qualitative research, the quality is determined by achieving dependability, credibility, transferability, and trustworthiness of the research (Morse, 2015). Dependability, which refers to the reliability to obtain the same results if the research repeated, credibility is the persistent observation, transferability is the ability to generalize the finding, and trustworthiness is about conducting rigorous research. In quantitative research, quality is determined by achieving the validity and reliability of the research (Heale & Twycross, 2015). Validity is about the accuracy of measuring the phenomenon under study; reliability is about the accuracy of the instrument where if it is used in another study, the result will be consistent. In my opinion, the soundness of the study (validity) in which the research accurately address the research phenomenon by using the right instruments (reliability) are the most critical components for evaluating the research quality.
Identify The Instrument Utilized In Your Chosen Article, Including Relevant Details Such As Requirements Or Tools.
I studied the article of Chaudhary, Rangnekar, & Barua (2013), in this article, the authors applied the human resource development climate survey instrument developed by Rao and Abraham (1986). The instrument tool consists from 38 questionnaires, and for every questionnaire, the participants choose one answer from 5-point scale - almost always true, mostly true, sometimes true, rarely true and not at all true (Chaudhary et al., 2013). Each point represented by a number from 1 to 5, the results divided into three dimensions, three scores or less, four scores, and five level scores. Before conducting the study, the authors confirm that the sample size requirements are adequate, the authors did not state how they confirm, but they must have used any of G*power test.
Discuss The Concepts of the Instrument’s Measurements and Their Psychometric Properties
To ensure the accuracy of the measurement the phenomenon of human resources development (validity) and the accuracy of the Rao and Abraham instrument (reliability), the authors used several test tools to test the sample size (Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin measure), internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha), and reliability using an item analysis. The 38 questionnaires items classified/categorized into six factors according to the outcome from the commonality test conducted using (AMOS 4) statistical package.
Explain why or why not you would use this instrument in your own DBA Doctoral Study, providing support based upon your assessment of its psychometric properties.
According to Chaudhary et al. (2013), the Rao and Abraham instrument is tested, examined, and validated as a reliable instrument in conducting human development research. The six factors namely “the top management belief and commitment to HRD, employee development, autonomy, openness and authenticity, rewards, performance and potential appraisal, superior-subordinate relationship, and trust collaboration and team spirit, were found to have reliability values above the acceptable value of 0.60” (Chaudhary et al., 2013, p.47),. Since the instrument tested, validated, and confirmed reliable superior to any other model as authors confirmed, in addition to that the same instrument is widely applied in the field of human resources development. So If I conduct a study in the future in the same field of research, I will use this instrument unless other instrument found as more reliable, recommended, and widely used in the peer-reviewed articles.
References
Chaudhary, R., Rangnekar, S., & Barua, M. (2013). Human resource development climate in India: Examining the psychometric properties of HRD climate survey instrument. Vision (09722629), 17(1), 41–52. doi.:10.1177/0972262912469564
Heale, R., & Twycross, A. (2015). Validity and reliability in quantitative studies. Evidence Based Nursing, 18(3), 66–67. doi:10.1136/eb-2015-102129
Mårtensson, P., Fors, U., Wallin, S., Zander, U., & Nilsson, G. H. (2016). Evaluating research: A multidisciplinary approach to assessing research practice and quality. Research Policy, 45(3), 593–603. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2015.11.009
Morse, J. M. (2015). Critical analysis of strategies for determining rigor in qualitative inquiry. Qualitative Health Research, 25(9), 1212–1222. doi:10.1177/1049732315588501
