Validity Types: Concurrent Validity And Constructed Validity

The perception of validity has evolved in recent years. In the past, experts believed that an experiment was valid with almost anything it correlated with (2). There are four types of validity: content validity, predictive validity, concurrent validity, and constructed validity. In this article, we take a closer look at concurrent and constructed validity.

Concurrent validity

Concurrent validity refers to whether test results actually evaluate test questions. In order to assess this validity, the tester must test and correlate it with the criteria. Criteria are measuring instruments that have been previously evaluated by the test author.

Such validity is similar to predictive validity. However, there are two differences between these two validations (1):

• In concurrent validity, test authors receive test evaluations and a criterion at the same time.
• The primary purposes of predictive validity and concurrent validity are different. The primary purpose of Konkurrent’s validity is to find tests that may be an alternative to other procedures that are less appropriate for a variety of reasons. For example, collective IQ tests may be similar to individual IQ tests.

But the main problem with such validity, however, is that it is difficult to find tests that serve as a valid and reliable criterion.

Built validity

Built validity  is a hypothetical concept that is part of the theories that try to explain human behavior. For example, intelligence and creativity.

This type of validity answers the question,  “how can the test result be explained psychologically?” The answer to this question may be the idea of ​​formulating a “mini-theory” regarding a psychological experiment.

Thus, constructed validity consists  of obtaining evidence to support whether the behaviors observed in the test are indicators of constructed validity (1).

The constructed validity process includes (1):

• Formation of hypotheses and relationships between constructed elements, other constructed theories, and external structures.
• Selection of pieces or tests (indicators) that describe the concrete manifestations of the structure.
• Gathering information.
• Consolidating consistency between data and hypotheses. Next, examining the degrees at which the data could be explained by alternative hypotheses.

Measures to consolidate constructed validity

There are a number of measures to consolidate constructed validity (1):

• Based on test-time theory, the psychologist reduces certain hypotheses about the expected behavior of people who get different results from the experiment.
• Next, information is collected that confirms or refutes these hypotheses.
• After taking into account the information obtained, it  is decided whether the theory explains the results well enough. If this is not the case, the theory will be further investigated and the process repeated until more detailed explanations are obtained.

In this sense, the validation process is a continuous transformation and improvement. The truth is that the results of research do not “confirm” or “prove” the whole theory. This is because the “structure” can never be fully demonstrated.

We can only simply accept it  as the best definition we can work with. There are three possible reasons why the results are negative (1,3):

• The first is that the test does not necessarily evaluate “structure”. Anyway, it doesn’t evaluate what we want it to evaluate, even if it does evaluate something.
• Next, the  theoretical structure may be wrong. As a result, all deductions may be incorrect.
• Finally, the  design of the experiment did not allow for appropriate hypothesis testing. Formatting failure is usually the most easily detected error. But accurate location of the error is even more difficult. Of course, an ambiguous interpretation of negative results is a downside to the constructed validity method.

Concurrent validity and constructed validity shed some light when it comes to test validation. It is therefore necessary to take into account certain parties during such confirmation.

Practical implications of test validation

Psychologists who use tests should consider these implications for four types of validity:

• Before making decisions regarding an individual or group, all available data from the test should  be collected.
• For prediction or selection, the  test must be validated in the specific situations in which it is used.
• In any situation, the psychologist must keep in mind that  new information is constantly shaping theories regarding the nature of the traits and everything they evaluate.

Validity helps to analyze psychological tests. As we know,  the more valid the test, the better it is  (without taking into account other variables). Unfortunately, in studies, this is not always the case, as there are other criteria that are included in this process, such as economic factors and availability.