Types of Reliability and Validity
The Values and Motives Questionnaire (VMQ) presents two types of reliability in the questionnaire that is primarily used for assessment consistency – test-retest reliability and homogeneity reliability (Psytech, 2016). The test-retest reliability is based on the similar scores data, which is evaluated according to a specific scale over the span of several test occasions, distinct in their time-period. On the contrary, homogeneity reliability calculation is established on the individual’s ability to independently measure similar constructs, which is used in the primary assessment. Such testing determines whether the tested items are identical in their ability to contribute to the overall measurement.
Validity is defined as the capability of the test results to reflect the intended outcomes of the assessment (Psytech, 2016). The first type is constructed validity, which defines if the actual test results are psychologically eloquent and corresponding to the objectives. The second criterion validity measures the test’s ability to translate the scores to predict the targeted goals. Such validity concept is widely used and critical in the majority of trials that indicate wellness or behaviors (Reynolds & Bennett, 2019). The inter-correlations method is defined to present construct validity.
Reliability: Cronbach Alpha Coefficients.
The Cronbach Alpha Coefficient is used to measure the internal consistency. There are a few categories that define the results of the assessment, whereas the high inter-correlation of the items between each other will show a higher coefficient and score on the top of the table. Such a result identifies that the measurement is performed between objectively equal variables. Low alpha scores demonstrate the errors of the assessment, suggesting that the measurement is performed between distinct subjects or miscalculations in the formulas.
Matching reliability and validity coefficients is a critical part of determining the assessment results. The desired measurements must give the results of desired dimensions and not random numbers that do not constitute the objectives. The VMI scales presented in the questionnaire are either approximate or exceed acceptable levels of internal consistency. 8/11 VMI Values demonstrate a 0.7 excessiveness, which defines an error. The Moral (0.68) and Independence (0.66) scales score below the average, whereas the Achievement scale calls for increased caution, with a 1.4 sten score (Psytech, 2016).
Sample Size and Nature of the Population
Validity
VMQ assesses a particular population, which consists of MBA and psychology scholars (Psytech, 2016). Despite the respectable selection, the reported results do not reflect the nationwide population as a whole due to the narrow sampling in terms of social class and location. Therefore, the choice of this specific population may reflect incorrect results, especially in the achievement section due to the academic superiority. Thus, the MBA and University degrees of the chosen people, small sampling size of 159 individuals, a third of which have the same occupations, calls for unreliable narrow outcomes of the testing.
VMQ Norming Population
The gender representation in the VMQ is distributed equally among 68 male and 87 female students, which does not raise concern on the validity (Psytech, 2016). Moreover, the test did not consider cultural peculiarities, comparing only to the examined values. In reality, different ethnicities and geographical locations possess distinct values, which are to significantly influence the outcomes. Thus, negligence of such essential factors creates weaknesses for the test validity, requiring to widen the sample size and their characteristics to receive a complete picture.
Personal Opinion
While reviewing the VMQ, I found the assessment and the results quite interesting. The methods and process of determining specific values Is an engaging and knowledgeable study, which allows determining of essential variables. Thus, the assessment is mostly a subjective view of the researched situation and requires a wide sampling size to retrieve reliable data that may be applied to the broader population. Nevertheless, the testing is proved to be valid and dependable and can be used as a feasible instrument; it is pertinent to initiate further research to retrieve empirical results.
References
Psytech. (2016). Values and motives questionnaire. The technical manual. Web.
Reynolds, G. S., & Bennett, J. B. (2019). A Brief Measure of Organizational Wellness Climate. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 61(12), 1052–1064. Web.