validity and reliability of the tools of data collection

In the field of IS, it is highly recommended to apply content validity while the new instrument is developed. Content ValidityĬontent validity is defined as “the degree to which items in an instrument reflect the content universe to which the instrument will be generalized” (Straub, Boudreau et al. Unfortunately, face validity is arguably the weakest form of validity and many would suggest that it is not a form of validity in the strictest sense of the word. recommended a minimally acceptable Kappa of 0.60 for inter-rater agreement.

Then the collected data is analysed using Cohen’s Kappa Index (CKI) in determining the face validity of the instrument.

Where favourable item means that the item is objectively structured and can be positively classified under the thematic category. In order to examine the face validity, the dichotomous scale can be used with categorical option of “Yes” and “No” which indicate a favourable and unfavourable item respectively.

In other words, face validity refers to researchers’ subjective assessments of the presentation and relevance of the measuring instrument as to whether the items in the instrument appear to be relevant, reasonable, unambiguous and clear. It evaluates the appearance of the questionnaire in terms of feasibility, readability, consistency of style and formatting, and the clarity of the language used. That is, a test has face validity if its content simply looks relevant to the person taking the test. Face validity is the degree to which a measure appears to be related to a specific construct, in the judgment of non-experts such as test takers and representatives of the legal system. Face Validityįace validity is a subjective judgment on the operationalization of a construct. Validity basically means “measure what is intended to be measured”. Validity explains how well the collected data covers the actual area of investigation.

Validity and reliability of the tools of data collection