通过相关和关联工具评估内容效度:贝叶斯随机等效实验

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS ACS Applied Bio Materials Pub Date : 2012-01-01 DOI:10.1027/1614-2241/A000040
B. Gajewski, Valorie Coffland, D. Boyle, M. Bott, L. Price, Jamie Leopold, N. Dunton
{"title":"通过相关和关联工具评估内容效度:贝叶斯随机等效实验","authors":"B. Gajewski, Valorie Coffland, D. Boyle, M. Bott, L. Price, Jamie Leopold, N. Dunton","doi":"10.1027/1614-2241/A000040","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Content validity elicits expert opinion regarding items of a psychometric instrument. Expert opinion can be elicited in many forms: for example, how essential an item is or its relevancy to a domain. This study developed an alternative tool that elicits expert opinion regarding correlations between each item and its respective domain. With 109 Registered Nurse (RN) site coordinators from National Database of Nursing Quality Indicators, we implemented a randomized Bayesian equivalence trial with coordinators completing ''relevance'' or ''correlation'' content tools regarding the RN Job Enjoyment Scale. We confirmed our hypothesis that the two tools would result in equivalent content information. A Bayesian ordered analysis model supported the results, suggesting that evidence for traditional content validity indices can be justified using correlation arguments.","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2012-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"18","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing Content Validity Through Correlation and Relevance Tools A Bayesian Randomized Equivalence Experiment\",\"authors\":\"B. Gajewski, Valorie Coffland, D. Boyle, M. Bott, L. Price, Jamie Leopold, N. Dunton\",\"doi\":\"10.1027/1614-2241/A000040\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Content validity elicits expert opinion regarding items of a psychometric instrument. Expert opinion can be elicited in many forms: for example, how essential an item is or its relevancy to a domain. This study developed an alternative tool that elicits expert opinion regarding correlations between each item and its respective domain. With 109 Registered Nurse (RN) site coordinators from National Database of Nursing Quality Indicators, we implemented a randomized Bayesian equivalence trial with coordinators completing ''relevance'' or ''correlation'' content tools regarding the RN Job Enjoyment Scale. We confirmed our hypothesis that the two tools would result in equivalent content information. A Bayesian ordered analysis model supported the results, suggesting that evidence for traditional content validity indices can be justified using correlation arguments.\",\"PeriodicalId\":2,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"18\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-2241/A000040\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-2241/A000040","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 18

摘要

内容效度引出专家对心理测量工具项目的意见。专家意见可以以多种形式引出:例如,一个项目有多重要,或者它与一个领域的相关性。本研究开发了一种替代工具,可以引出关于每个项目与其各自领域之间相关性的专家意见。109名注册护士(RN)现场协调员来自国家护理质量指标数据库,我们实施了一项随机贝叶斯等效试验,协调员完成了关于注册护士工作享受量表的“相关性”或“相关性”内容工具。我们确认了我们的假设,即这两个工具将产生相同的内容信息。贝叶斯有序分析模型支持结果,表明传统内容效度指标的证据可以使用相关参数来证明。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Assessing Content Validity Through Correlation and Relevance Tools A Bayesian Randomized Equivalence Experiment
Content validity elicits expert opinion regarding items of a psychometric instrument. Expert opinion can be elicited in many forms: for example, how essential an item is or its relevancy to a domain. This study developed an alternative tool that elicits expert opinion regarding correlations between each item and its respective domain. With 109 Registered Nurse (RN) site coordinators from National Database of Nursing Quality Indicators, we implemented a randomized Bayesian equivalence trial with coordinators completing ''relevance'' or ''correlation'' content tools regarding the RN Job Enjoyment Scale. We confirmed our hypothesis that the two tools would result in equivalent content information. A Bayesian ordered analysis model supported the results, suggesting that evidence for traditional content validity indices can be justified using correlation arguments.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
期刊最新文献
A Systematic Review of Sleep Disturbance in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension. Advancing Patient Education in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension: The Promise of Large Language Models. Anti-Myelin-Associated Glycoprotein Neuropathy: Recent Developments. Approach to Managing the Initial Presentation of Multiple Sclerosis: A Worldwide Practice Survey. Association Between LACE+ Index Risk Category and 90-Day Mortality After Stroke.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1