Criterion validity

Teare, M., Fristad, M.A., Weller, E.B., Weller, R.A., and Salmon, R (1998). Development and criterion validity of the Children s Interview for Psychiatric Syndromes (ChIPS)./ Child Adolesc Psy-chopharmacol 8 205-211. 

Parrott, A.C., Performance tests in human psychopharmacology (2) content validity, criterion validity, and face validity, Hum. Psychopharmacol. Clin. Exp., 6, 91, 1991. 

Before any examination of structure-property relationships in the field of thermal aging, it is essential to understand that there is no one universal stability criterion, valid for all polymers under all circumstances. This is illustrated by the following examples. 

Presently, validity is represented as a process whereby we determine the degree of confidence we can place on inferences we make about people based on their scores from that scale. Some different types of validity, a discussion of which is beyond the scope of this chapter, are called content validity, criterion validity, and construct validity. 

Criterion validity is demonstrated when a new measure corresponds to an established measure or observation that accurately reflects the phenomenon of interest. By definition, the criterion must be a superior measure of the phenomenon if it is to serve as a comparative norm. However, in QOL assessment, gold standards, or criterion measures, rarely exist against which a new measure can be compared. 

Test Criterion Validity of the test positive control Biodegradability of the material sample test... 

Conte, J. M. et al. (2001). Criterion validity evidence for time urgency Associations... 

Of conrse, this approach is based on the assumption that safety culture correlates with safety outcomes. Therefore, it is of critical importance to confirm the cnltnre-ontcome link, which is one of the requirements for a safety culture scale, understood as criterion validity - a more comprehensive summary of the required properties can be found in other literature (e.g. Itoh et al. 2012). For this applied purpose of safety culture, this chapter specifically looks at dimensions of safety culture, how to measure safety outcomes, and the safety culture-outcome link through an examination of case studies, primarily drawn from Japanese hospitals. Before stating these issues in detail, we will, in the rest of this section, briefly argue notions of safety culture (and safety climate). 

In this subsection, we apply another type of safety performance data, i.e., self-reported staff attitudes to error reporting and interaction with the patient, to the test of criterion validity of the safety culture factors. For this purpose, we used the nurse sample of the Japanese data including more than 17,000 questionnaire responses collected from 82 hospitals (Itoh and Andersen, 2010). An example of resrrlts of correlation analysis is shown in Table 4.10 in terms of Spearman s rho, using the mild outcome case in the three vignettes offered - results for the near-miss and severe cases were quite similar to this case. 

Correlation peak-height validation works based on the height of the peaks in the correlation plane. If Pi is the highest peak and P2 is the second highest peak, the most common approach, called the detectability criterion, validates vectors for which P1/P2 > k, where k is typically around 1.2 (Keane and Adrian, 1992). 

Validity refers to whether the smvey instrument measures what it claims to measure. There are three basic types of validity for a measurement scale, each with particular experimental and statistical methodologies for evaluation. These are content validity (do relevant experts agree that the survey appears to measure what it is supposed to measme ), criterion validity (can scores from the survey be used to predict individual behavior or performance ), and construct validity (are the relationships found with the survey consistent with relevant theory and research ). 

Criterion validity can be evaluated with two different validity-tesbng techniques concurrent and predictive validity. Concurrent validity is most frequently used and refers simply to the relationship between the scale results—in this case my weight in pounds—and anotirer simultaneous assessment of the factor the scale is supposed to measure. This assessment could result from measuring my weight with another scale or visually estimating my weight. 

The importance of construct validity. It is possible that a direct relationship between a predictor (such as the measure of accident proneness) and a criterion (such as the number of at-risk behaviors or recordable injuries) can be found (predictive validity) without supporting the underlying principle(s) or theory. This would indicate the absence of construct validity. Suppose, for example, an individual could figure out how to answer the survey questions in order to receive a favorable score. Then, construct validity would be questionable, even if criterion validity were high. 

Whereas such a development may result in indicators with an improved face validity and acceptance by the users, it is uncertain whether validity actually has improved. A study has shown that production personnel, safety personnel and managers tend to overestimate the effects of safety-management elements on the risk of accidents at the same time as they underestimate the effects of general and production-management elements (Tinmannsvik, 1991). When these personnel participate in the development of SHE rating systems, these biases will be transferred to the new system and result in poor criterion validity. 

Tousignant M., Smeesters C., Breton A.M., Breton E., Corriveau H. (2006) Criterion validity study of the cervical range of motion (CROM) device for rotational range of motion on healthy adults. 

M. Tousignant, L. de Bellefeuille, S. O Donoughue, S. Grahovac. (2000) Criterion validity of the cervical range of motion (CROM) goniometer for cervical flexion and extension. Spine 25(3) 324-30. 

For a non-redox system, of any degree of complexity, 2f(0) - f(H) is linearly dependent on the charge balance and other concentration balance(s) referred to this system. The dependency/independency properly of the balance 2f(0) - f(H) is then the criterion distinguishing between redox and non-redox systems. This criterion, valid primarily for aqueous media, ° can be extended to the systems where other solvents are involved, particularly to binary-solvent media. 

Remark There exists a general relation, the so called evolution criterion, valid also beyond the linear regime, dx < 0. If we apply this to Eq. (7.73) we conclude that... 

---