Adcock and Collier - Measurement Validity (Methods)

Adcock and Collier - Measurement Validity (Methods) -...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Measurement Validity: A Shard Standard for Qualitative and Quantitative Research-Adcock and Collier 529-The major question that we have to ask is “Do the observations meaningfully capture the ideas contained in the concepts?” The main concern of this article is with measurement validity which looks at whether operationalization and the scoring of cases really reflect what the researcher is trying to measure. With these two concepts, the researcher is turning abstracts into quantifiable values and this can have some problems. The article tries to show how one can prove or lose validity. Measurement validity is essentially a methodological topic. One major challenge that the article seeks to address is the concept of shared standards between quantitative and qualitative scholars. Another main issue is that of the difference between measurement validity and the meaning of concepts. Concepts are a whole different issue than validity, and while they need to be clarified in order to have good, meaningful discussion and communication, they are not what needs to be examined when considering measurement validity. 530-Measurement validity is also dependent on context. Some measures a valid in one context but not in another. There is also some confusion on terms, what exactly validity and validation are. Validity measures the overall issue we are talking about with measurement validity, whether or not we are assessing an issue correctly. But we can also asses validity in terms of different kinds of validation. The issue of measurement validity comes about when we are talking about moving between concepts and observations. We have a theory or think something is true and then we apply it to our observations in an effort to analyze, measure and possibly prove it. Whether or not we do this correctly or our results are any good depends upon our level of measurement validity. This article includes a huge chart involving background concept, systematized concept, indicators, and scores for cases, which I don’t really understand. Lets try anyway. Level 1-Background Concept: When thinking about a certain concept, this is the broadest level of multiple meanings that accompany it. Level 2-Systematized Concept: The specific formulation or beliefs and theories about a concept used by the researcher. Out of all the background information, the researcher draws out his or her specific theory and defines it here. Level 3-Indicators-Also called measures, this is where the quantitative numbers are. It is also the stage at which the concepts are operationalized. Level 4-Scores for Cases-This is where most of the qualitative break down is done, when
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 03/01/2009 for the course POLY SCI 207 taught by Professor Glasgow,g during the Fall '08 term at UCSB.

Page1 / 3

Adcock and Collier - Measurement Validity (Methods) -...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online