Discovering the critical number of respondents to validate an item in a questionnaire: The Binomial Cut-level Content Validity proposal
Fuente:
arXiv
Enregistré dans:
| Auteurs principaux: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Preprint |
| Publié: |
2024
|
| Sujets: | |
| Accès en ligne: | |
| Tags: |
Ajouter un tag
Pas de tags, Soyez le premier à ajouter un tag!
|
| _version_ | 1866917355022450688 |
|---|---|
| author | Costa, Helder Gomes Shimoda, Eduardo Costa, José Fabiano da Serra Shimoya, Aldo Eufrazio, Edilvando Pereira |
| author_facet | Costa, Helder Gomes Shimoda, Eduardo Costa, José Fabiano da Serra Shimoya, Aldo Eufrazio, Edilvando Pereira |
| contents | The question that drives this research is: "How to discover the number of respondents that are necessary to validate items of a questionnaire as actually essential to reach the questionnaire's proposal?" Among the efforts in this subject, \cite{Lawshe1975, Wilson2012, Ayre_CVR_2014} approached this issue by proposing and refining the Content Validation Ratio (CVR) that looks to identify items that are actually essentials. Despite their contribution, these studies do not check if an item validated as "essential" should be also validated as "not essential" by the same sample, which should be a paradox. Another issue is the assignment a probability equal a 50\% to a item be randomly checked by a respondent as essential, despite an evaluator has three options to choose. Our proposal faces these issues, making it possible to verify if a paradoxical situation occurs, and being more precise in recommending whether an item should either be retained or discarded from a questionnaire. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2410_11151 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2024 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | Discovering the critical number of respondents to validate an item in a questionnaire: The Binomial Cut-level Content Validity proposal Costa, Helder Gomes Shimoda, Eduardo Costa, José Fabiano da Serra Shimoya, Aldo Eufrazio, Edilvando Pereira Methodology Information Theory Applications 62P05, 62P10, 62P10, 62P12, 62P15, 62P20, 62P25, 90B50, 91B06, 90C29, 90C31, 91A35, 91B06 G.3; H.4; H.4.2 The question that drives this research is: "How to discover the number of respondents that are necessary to validate items of a questionnaire as actually essential to reach the questionnaire's proposal?" Among the efforts in this subject, \cite{Lawshe1975, Wilson2012, Ayre_CVR_2014} approached this issue by proposing and refining the Content Validation Ratio (CVR) that looks to identify items that are actually essentials. Despite their contribution, these studies do not check if an item validated as "essential" should be also validated as "not essential" by the same sample, which should be a paradox. Another issue is the assignment a probability equal a 50\% to a item be randomly checked by a respondent as essential, despite an evaluator has three options to choose. Our proposal faces these issues, making it possible to verify if a paradoxical situation occurs, and being more precise in recommending whether an item should either be retained or discarded from a questionnaire. |
| title | Discovering the critical number of respondents to validate an item in a questionnaire: The Binomial Cut-level Content Validity proposal |
| topic | Methodology Information Theory Applications 62P05, 62P10, 62P10, 62P12, 62P15, 62P20, 62P25, 90B50, 91B06, 90C29, 90C31, 91A35, 91B06 G.3; H.4; H.4.2 |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.11151 |