Validity convergent

Experimental parameters may correlate with established parameters (convergent validity), such as resistance to diseases and evaluation of taste (step 7a). In that case, the experimental parameters offer no added value and the parameter which is least expensive to implement will be chosen in the future. On the other hand, there may be no correlation which might suggest... 

Validity Convergent validity—sensitive to many forms of sleep deprivation Ecological validity—sensitive to performance used in everyday functioning Theoretical validity—reflects changes consistent with theorized functions of sleep... 

TABLE 1 Extrinsic convergent validation profiles across three measures having verbal content... 

Reflective constructs in PLS analysis need to be evaluated with respect to their Indicator reliability, internal consistency reliability, convergent validity, and discriminant validity (Hair et al. 2011a Hair et al. 2011b). 

Convei nt validity describes the extent to which extent the items convei e on their theoretical construct (Campbell and Fiske 1959). In PLS, convergent validity is measured via the average variance extracted, which should be higher than 0,5 to fulfill the criterion (Hair et aL 2011b). Average variance extracted measures the extent to which the average variance of the indicators is explained by its theoretic construct (Fomell and Larcker 1981). As indicated in Table 12 and Table 14, all the reflective constructs used are substantially above the cutoff value of 0,5, and convergent validity is established. 

Indicator rdiabiliQr Internal consistency reUabUitv Convergence validity... 

Correlations between the CEDA and other engineering creativity and spatial measures were conducted to establish convergent validity. The CEDA was moderately correlated with the PCT (r = 0.39, p < 0.01) and slightly correlated with the Purdue Visualization Spatial Test-Rotations (PVST-R) (r — 0.19, p < 0.05). The CEDA, including usefulness in the formula of assessment, demonstrated similar results. The CEDA with usefulness was moderately correlated with the... 

In addition, according to the standard of convergent validity assessed by FomeU and Larcker (1981), all standardized factor loadings should be greater than 0.5 and should be above 0.6 in terms of composite reliability, as shown in Table 1 that all constructs indicator-factor loadings are above 0.5, all composite reliabilities (CR) are above 0.7, average variance extracted (AVE) is above 0.5. Measurement scales see Appendix A. 

The construct validity of a scale is usually evaluated witir tests of convergent and divergent validity. Convergent validity refers to tire extent that other measures of the same construct (for example, a visual estimate of weight) relate to each other. Divergent validity indicates tire extent that scores from surveys unrelated to the construct do not correlate with survey scores related to the construct. In other words, divergent validity implies the extent a particular questionnaire measures special characteristics not measured by other scales. 

The ethics of survey administration require that respondents give their informed consent to be tested and that they know how their answers will be used. This second ethic, termed "demand characteristics" in the research literature (Orne, 1969), is problematic for an employee selection device with transparent items. A significant relationship between scores on such a survey and other indicators (convergent validity) could reflect principles and theory other than those presumed. 

Using confirmatory factor analysis with LISREL, steps were undertaken tocheck (1) unidimensionality and convergent validity, (2) reliability, (3) discriminant validity, and (4) second-order constract validity of the measurement. Unidimensionality is... 

CFI = 1.00, NNFI = 1.00). All the factor loadings are greater than 0.80 and significant at p < 0.01 based on t-values. This indicates good convergent validity. The estimate of AVE of 0.75 and the composite reliability of 0.92 exceed the critical value of 0.50 and 0.70 respectively, providing evidence of good reliability. 

Hamiss, M. K., Epstein, M. H., Ryser, G., Pearson, N. (1999). The Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale Convergent validity. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 17(1), 4-14. 

---