What is the difference between predictive and concurrent validity

These are two different types of criterion validity, each of which has a specific purpose. In this article, we first explain what criterion validity is and when it should be used, before discussing concurrent validity and predictive validity, providing examples of both.

Criterion validity reflects the use of a criterion - a well-established measurement procedure - to create a new measurement procedure to measure the construct you are interested in. The criterion and the new measurement procedure must be theoretically related.

The measurement procedures could include a range of research methods e. Each of these is discussed in turn:. To create a shorter version of a well-established measurement procedure. You want to create a shorter version of an existing measurement procedure, which is unlikely to be achieved through simply removing one or two measures within the measurement procedure e.

Therefore, you have to create new measures for the new measurement procedure. However, to ensure that you have built a valid new measurement procedure, you need to compare it against one that is already well-established; that is, one that already has demonstrated construct validity and reliability [see the articles: Construct validity and Reliability in research ]. This well-established measurement procedure is the criterion against which you are comparing the new measurement procedure i.

Indeed, sometimes a well-established measurement procedure e. A measurement procedure can be too long because it consists of too many measures e. Whilst the measurement procedure may be content valid i. We also stated that a measurement procedure may be longer than would be preferable , which mirrors that argument above; that is, that it's easier to get respondents to complete a measurement procedure when it's shorter.

If we want to assess the concurrent validity of a new measure of empowerment, we might give the measure to both migrant farm workers and to the farm owners, theorizing that our measure should show that the farm owners are higher in empowerment. As in any discriminating test, the results are more powerful if you are able to show that you can discriminate between two groups that are very similar.

In convergent validity , we examine the degree to which the operationalization is similar to converges on other operationalizations that it theoretically should be similar to. For instance, to show the convergent validity of a Head Start program, we might gather evidence that shows that the program is similar to other Head Start programs.

Or, to show the convergent validity of a test of arithmetic skills, we might correlate the scores on our test with scores on other tests that purport to measure basic math ability, where high correlations would be evidence of convergent validity.

In discriminant validity , we examine the degree to which the operationalization is not similar to diverges from other operationalizations that it theoretically should be not be similar to.

Or, to show the discriminant validity of a test of arithmetic skills, we might correlate the scores on our test with scores on tests that of verbal ability, where low correlations would be evidence of discriminant validity. We send an occasional email to keep our users informed about new developments on Conjoint.

You can always unsubscribe later. Your email will not be shared with other companies. Request consultation. Looking for a free online survey tool? Get started for free. Trochim hosted by Conjoint. Free Survey Tool Fully-functional online survey tool with various question types, logic, randomisation, and reporting for unlimited number of responses and surveys. Start now View details. List of articles Back. Next topic. Subscribe to updates from Conjoint. Or Sign Up now Close. Estimating activity energy expenditure: how valid are physical activity questionnaires?

Sports Med. The relationships of change in physical activity with change in depression, anxiety, and burnout: a longitudinal study of Swedish healthcare workers. Criterion validity reflects the use of a criterion - a well-established measurement procedure - to create a new measurement procedure to measure the construct you are interested in.

A key difference between concurrent and predictive validity has to do with: the time frame during which data on the criterion measure is collected. This issue must be considered when drawing conclusions on PA levels, found in various studies, in which the time spent sedentary is often assessed using similar questions to the ones used in the current study.

By using this website, you agree to our Finally, receiver characteristics curve ROC analysis was performed to assess the ability of the five different instruments, to correctly classify participants meeting and not meeting the two interpretations of the Swedish National PA recommendations.

This lesson will cover concurrent validity and illustrate the difference between concurrent and predictive validity. A test that predicts students' future achievement calls for predictive validity, or evidence gathered over a period of time of the relationship between the test and the criterion test.

Huang Y, Liu X. For example, participants that score high on the new measurement procedure would also score high on the well-established test; and the same would be said for medium and low scores. In a study of concurrent validity the test is administered at the same time as the criterion is collected.

Briefly identify and describe three measures of central tendency and three measures of dispersion. Metabolic syndrome was found in Thus, the stronger predictive validity for the questionnaires, using fixed answer alternatives PHAS and SGPALS , indicate that these questions are clinically most useful, and this should be considered by health professionals when choosing questionnaires to assess PA.

Concurrent validity applies to validation studies in which the two measures are administered at approximately the same time. Predictive validity refers to the degree of correlation between the measure of the concept and some future measure of the same concept. A distinction can be made between internal and external validity. External validity is about generalization: To what extent can an effect in research, be generalized to populations, settings, treatment variables, and measurement variables?

External validity is usually split into two distinct types, population validity and ecological validity and they are both essential elements in judging the strength of an experimental design. Showing that an IQ test is valid by comparing the results of it to academic results and seeing a positive correlation.

Article Importance of characteristics and modalities of physical activity and exercise in the management of cardiovascular health in individuals with cardiovascular risk factors: recommendations from the EACPR. What is the difference between convergent and concurrent validity? Chegg home. The latter is somewhat surprising, as earlier reports typically [19] find low concurrent validity for self-reported sedentary time.

You will have to build a case for the criterion validity of your measurement procedure; ultimately, it is something that will be developed over time as more studies validate your measurement procedure.

It is therefore concerning, that the studied questions poorly predicted fulfilment of current PA recommendations. Public Health Nutr.

Article This well-established measurement procedure is the criterion against which you are comparing the new measurement procedure i. But in ease of concurrent validity we need not wait for longer gaps. This is a key limitation of self-report measures of PA, as the identification of individuals meeting or not meeting PA recommendations, is commonly used for risk assessment of certain health outcomes.

Conversely, the reported time spent in MVPA was higher than the values obtained by accelerometry i. J Intern Med. CAS In a research design, especially in a quantitative research, reliability and validity are highly important. It is different from predictive validity, which requires you to compare test scores to performance on some other measure in … Google Scholar.

Objectively-assessed and self-reported sedentary time in relation to multiple socioeconomic status indicators among adults in England: a cross-sectional study. PubMed ; Our data and others [26] indicate that self-reported time spent sedentary are greatly underestimated. PLoS One. Criterion validity is a good test of whether such newly applied measurement procedures reflect the criterion upon which they are based.

Concurrent and predictive validity of physical activity measurement items commonly used in clinical settings— data from SCAPIS pilot study. Table 1 shows participant characteristics.

Predictive validity was assessed using logistic regression, controlling for potential confounders. Revised on June 19, It is a form of criterion validity, in which how well the test works is established by measuring it against known criteria.

Article Criterion validity is demonstrated when there is a strong relationship between the scores from the two measurement procedures, which is typically examined using a correlation. This is unlike concurrent validity that compares results almost simultaneously. This implies that their use for judging individual PA level or pattern is, per se, limited. The descriptive data is presented as proportions or median and 25th—75th percentile Q1—Q3. There are many occasions when you might choose to use a well-established measurement procedure e.

The answers from the open questions predicted low intensity activities better, as shown in Table 2. Concurrent validity was assessed as correlations and ROC-analyses. Skip Navigation.

Hypothetically, this may be due to a better ability among respondents to rank themselves in a group, rather than giving a correct estimate of their time use. Then, you can test your new knowledge with a quiz. Concurrent validity and predictive validity are two types of criterion-related validity. Odds ratios were adjusted for age and gender in the first model and for age, gender, education level, EI, smoking and psychosocial stress, in the second.