Journal of Management Research

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access
Open Access Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Restricted Access Subscription Access

Assessment of Construct Validity in Management Research


Affiliations
1 Training & Career Development Division Department of Human Resources Saudi Industrial Development Fund P.O. Box 4143, Riyadh 11149, Saudi Arabia
     

   Subscribe/Renew Journal


The use of unobservable constructs in management research is common. But an error in measuring a construct may have a serious effect on research findings. To bring rigor in research, it is therefore, essential for the researcher to first establish an evidence of construct validity before testing the theory. Construct validity is a complex process and often a researcher looks for an adequate framework to negotiate this. This paper explains the importance of construct validity in management research and provides a structured framework for assessing it.

Keywords

Construct Validity, Content/face Validity, Trait Validity, Nomological Validity
User
Notifications

  • Anastasi, A. (1982), Psychological Testing (5th Ed.), MacMillan, New York.

  • Anderson, J. C. and Gerbing, D. W. (1988), Structural Equation Modeling in Practice: A Review and Recommended Two Step Approach, Psychological Bulletin, 103: 411-423.

  • Bagozzi, R. P. and Phillips, L.W. (1982), Representing and Testing Organizational Theories: A Holistic Construal, Administrative Science Quarterly, 27: 459-489.

  • Bagozzi, R. P. and Yi, Y. (1991), Multitraite-multimethod Matrices in Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research, 17: 426- 439.

  • Bagozzi, R. P., Yi, Y. and Phillips, L. W. (1991), Assessing Construct Validity in Organizational Research, Administrative Science Quaterly, 36: 421-458.

  • Bhattacherjee, A. (2002), Individual Trust in Online Firms: Scale Development and Initial Test, Journal of Management Information Systems, 19: 211-241.

  • Bohrnstedt, G. (1983). Measurement, in Wright, J. and Anderson, A. (Eds.), Handbook of Survey Research, Academic Press, San Diego.

  • Boyd, K. B., Gove, S. and Hitt, M. A. (2005), Construct Measurement in Strategic Management Research: Illusion or reality?, Strategic Management Journal, 26: 239-257.

  • Campbell, D. T. and Fiske, D. W. (1959), Convergent and Discriminant Validation by the Multitrait-multimethod Matrix, Psychological Bulletin, 56: 81-105.

  • Campbell, J. (1982), Editorial: Some Remarks from the Outgoing Editor, Journal of Applied Psychology, 67: 691-700.

  • Chatterjee, S., Lubatkin, M. H., Schweiger, D. M. and Weber, Y. (1992), Cultural Difference and Shareholders Value in Related Mergers: Linking Equity and Human Capital, Strategic Management Journal, 13: 319-334.

  • Churchill, G. A. (1979), A Paradigm for Developing Better Measures of Marketing Constructs, Journal of Marketing Research, 16: 64-73.

  • Cook, J. D., Hepworth S. J., Wall, T. D. and Warr, P. B. (1981), The Experience of Work: A Compendium and Review of 249 Measures and Their Use, Academic Press, New York.

  • Cote, J. A. and Buckley, M. R. (1988), Measurement Error and Theory Testing in Consumer Research: An Illustration of Importance of Construct Validation, Journal of Consumer Behavior, 14: 579-582.

  • Cronbach, L. J. (1971), Test Validation, in Thorndike, R. L. (Ed.), Educational Measurement (2nd Ed), American Council of Education, Washington DC.

  • Doty, D. H. and Glick, W. H. (1998), Common Method Bias: Does Common Method Variance Really Bias Results?, Organizational Research Methods, 1: 374-406.

  • Dunn. S. C., Seaker, R. F. and Waller, M. A. (1994), Latent Variables in Business Logistics Research: Scale Development and Validation, Journal of Business Logistics, 15: 145-172.

  • Elbert, N. F. and Belohav, J. (1977), The Misleading Influence of Method Variance When a Multitrait-Multimethod Technique is Used, American Institute of Decision Sciences 9th Annual Proceedings, pp. 286-288.

  • Gerbing, D. W. and Anderson, J. C. (1988), An Updated Paradigm for Scale Development Incorporating Unidimensionality and its Assessment, Journal of Marketing Research, 25: 186-192.

  • Garver, M. S. and Mentzer, J. T. (1999), Logistics Research Methods: Employing Structural Equation Modeling to Test for Construct Validity, Journal of Business Logistics, 20: 33-57.

  • Gerhart, B., Wright, P. M., McMahan, G. C. and Snell, S. A. (2000), Measurement Error in Research on Human Resources and Firm Performance: How Much Error is There and How Does it Influence Effect Size Estimate?, Personal Psychology, 53: 803-834.

  • Govindarajan, V. and Kopalle, P. (2006), Disruptiveness of Innovations: Measurement and an Assessment of Reliability and Validity, Strategic Management Journal, 27: 189-199.

  • Hinkin, T. R. (1995), A Review of Scale Development Practices in the Study of Organizations, Journal of Management, 21: 967- 988.

  • Hinkin, T. R. and Schriesheim, C. A. (1989), Development and Application of New Scales to Measure the French and Raven (1959) Bases of Social Power, Journal of Applied Psychology, 74: 561-567.

  • Jackson, D. N. (1969), Multimethod Factor Analysis in the Evaluation of Convergent and Discriminant Validity, Psychological Bulletin, 72: 30-49.

  • John, G. and Reve, T. (1979), Construct Validation in Marketing: A Comparison of Methods in Assessing the Validity of the Affective, Cognative, and Cognitive Components of Attitudes, Advances in Consumer Research, 6: 288-294.

  • Karim, N. H. A. and Noor, N. H. N. M. (2006), Evaluating the Psychometric Properties of Allen and Meyer.s Organizational Commitment Scale: A Cross Cultural Application Among Malaysian Academic Libraries, Malaysian Journal of Library and Information Science, 11: 89-101.

  • McDonald, R. P. (1981), The Dimensionality of Tests and Items, British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 34: 100- 117.

  • Medsker, G. J., Williams, L. J. and Holahan, P. J. (1994), A Review of Current Practices for Evaluating Causal Models in Organizational Behavior and Human Resources Management Research, Journal of Management, 20: 439-464.

  • Mentzer, J. T. and Flint, D. J. ( 1997), Validity in Logistics Research, Journal of Business Logistics, 18: 199-216.

  • Nunally, J. C. (1978), Psychometric Theory (2nd Ed.), McGrawHill, New York.

  • Peter, J. P. (1979), Reliability: A Review of Psychometric Basics and Recent Marketing Practices, Journal of Marketing Research, 16: 6-17.

  • Peter, J. P. (1981), Construct Validity: A Review of Basic Issues and Marketing Practices, Journal of Marketing Research, 18: 133- 145.

  • Podsakoff, P. M. and Dalton, D. R. (1987), Research Methodology in Organizational Studies, Journal of Management, 13: 419-441.

  • Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y. and Podsakoff, N. P. ( 2003), Common Method Biases in Behavioral Research: A Critical Review of the Literature and Recommended Remedies, Journal of Applied Psychology, 88: 879-903.

  • Scandura, T. A. and Williams, E. A. (2000), Research Methodology in Management: Current Pratices, Trends and Implications for Future Research, Academy of Management Journal, 43: 1248-1264.

  • Schoenfeldt, L. F. (1984), Psychometric Properties of Organizational Research Instruments, in Bateman, T. S. and Ferris, G. R. (Eds.), Method and Analysis in Organizational Research, Reston Publishing Reston, VA.

  • Schriesheim, C. A., Powers, K. J., Scandura, T. A., Gardiner, C. C. and Lamkau. M. J. (1993), Improving Construct Measurement in Management Research: Comments and a Quantitative Approach for Assessing the Theoretical Content Adequacy of Paper and Pencil Survey-type Instruments, Journal of Management, 19: 385-417.

  • Schriesheim, C. A., Hinkin, T. R. and Podsakoff, P. M. (1991), Can Ipsative Measurement Produce Erroneous Results in Field Studies of Five Frence and Raven Bases of Power? An Empirical Investigation, Journal of Applied Psychology, 76: 106-114.

  • Shook, C. L., Ketchen, D. J., Hult , G. T. and Kacmer, K. M. ( 2004), An Assessment of the Use of Structural Equation Modeling in Strategic Management Research, Strategic Management Journal, 25: 397-404.

  • Steenkamp, J. B. and Vantrijp, H. C. M. (1991), The Use of LISREL in Validating Marketing Constructs, International Journal of Research in Marketing , 8: 283-299.

  • Straub, D. W. (1989), Validating Instruments in MIS Research, MIS Quarterly, June: 147-169.

  • Subramaniam, M. and Venkatraman, N. (2001), Determinants of Transnational New Product Development Capability: Testing the Influence of Transferring and Deploying Tacit Overseas Knowledge, Strategic Management Journal, 22: 359-378.

  • Terblanche, N. S. and Boshoff, C. (2006), Improved Scale Development in Marketing: An Empirical Illustration, International Journal of Market Research, 50: 105-119.

  • Venkatraman, N. and Grant, J. H. (1986), Construct Measurement in Organizational Strategy Research: A Critic and Proposal, Academy of Management Review, 11: 71-87.

  • Venkatraman, N. and Ramanujam, V. (1987), Measurement of Business Performance Economic Performance: An Examination of Method Convergence, Journal of Management, 13: 109-122.


Abstract Views: 652

PDF Views: 1




  • Assessment of Construct Validity in Management Research

Abstract Views: 652  |  PDF Views: 1

Authors

Siddhartha S Brahma
Training & Career Development Division Department of Human Resources Saudi Industrial Development Fund P.O. Box 4143, Riyadh 11149, Saudi Arabia

Abstract


The use of unobservable constructs in management research is common. But an error in measuring a construct may have a serious effect on research findings. To bring rigor in research, it is therefore, essential for the researcher to first establish an evidence of construct validity before testing the theory. Construct validity is a complex process and often a researcher looks for an adequate framework to negotiate this. This paper explains the importance of construct validity in management research and provides a structured framework for assessing it.

Keywords


Construct Validity, Content/face Validity, Trait Validity, Nomological Validity

References