Realiability and Validity Rosenburg Scale

Reliability and Validity of the Rosenberg Self Esteem plate Texas A&M University Psychology 203 Introduction The purpose of our sketch was to evaluate the reliability and grimness of the Rosenber Self-Esteem home plate scores. Reliability is only whether the accountment appliance you atomic number 18 using measures something consistently. For example does the same hear show the same results when administered repeatedly. Validity is the aspect of a bill tool that signifies its measuring rod what it says it does.A valid run measures what it says its measuring. However you foot collect a test that is honest and non valid, for example if a instructor administers a spell out test that the pupil has to complete on the computing machine in a five minute time period. A student may get the same score over and over again, indicating its reliable, but it may non be valid because what if that student was silent at typing but knew how to spell every word. The test would n ot be valid because its not measuring just spelling as intended but also typing speed.Both reliability and validity are crucial in and try because if the research instruments are not reliable and valid, then the results of your experiment will always be in question. Method All ninety-nine A&M students (N=99) that participated in the survey were in the same statistical writing course and were inevitable to take the survey as part of the course curriculum. The survey consisted of 24 males and 75 females, with the average age of these participants beingness around 20 long time old, ranging anywhere from 19 to 24 (M=20. 7, SD=. 997). the survey measured egoism by using ten items from the Rosenberg Self Esteem Scale. The students were scored by taking the besotted of all their responses to the ten questions. 10 different contestations that the participant rated on a scale of 1 to 7, (1 being disagree strongly and 7 being agree strongly), the higher the score the higher the indi viduals self-conceit. The scale consisted of 5 revers coded items an example of a normal item is on the tout ensemble I am satisfied with myself.A reverse coded item is an opposite statement for example is I feel I do not set about much to be proud of. Results The 10 item subscale from the Rosenberg Self-Esteem scale appeared to dedicate good inborn consistency, (? = . 90). All the survey question appeared to be worth keeping in fact the deletion of any of the questions would kick in resulted in a subalterner alpha score. All 99 participants (N=99) responses to the 10 item survey were averaged together and the self-esteem score for all the participants had ranged from 2. 6-7 with a mean of 5. 4 (M=5. 4, SD=1. 08).The frequency distribution of the average self-esteem scores, illustrated on the histogram, portrays a distribution that is pretty normal but somewhat prohibitly. This negative distributions means that the participants more frequently had high self-esteem scores tha n low scores. In fact no participants had a self-esteem score pull down than 2. 6. Discussion To ensure that the survey instrument used in this take was actually measuring self-esteem we took a measure of Cronbachs alpha ( or ? ), which is a special measure of reliability known as internal consistency.The internal consistency reliability of survey instruments (e. g. Rosenberg Self-Esteem scale), is a measure of reliability of different survey items intended to measure the same characteristic, in this case self-esteem. For example, there were 10 different questions related to self-esteem level. each question implies a response scale from 1 to 7. Responses from the group of the 99 respondents have been obtained. In reality, answers to different questions vary for each particular respondent, although the items are intended to measure the same aspect or quantity.The smaller this variableness (or stronger the correlation), the greater the internal consistency reliability of this surve y instrument. So in this survey the self-esteem scale was found to be highly reliable (10 items = . 90). We can safely assume that our survey items reliably measure self-esteem levels. One other way we might have assessed reliability would have been to get all the participants to take another Self-Esteem survey of comparable design but with different questions.In social sciences in particular making sure that your research has construct validity is very important. Construct validity has traditionally been defined as the experimental demonstration that a test is measuring the construct it claims to be measuring, in laymens terms does the measuring tool actually measure the theory under examination.? Am I actually measuring what I think I am measuring? In our example construct validity would be how well body politic our observational tool (Rosenberg self-esteem scale) assess one dimension of self-esteem.We could of inter-correlated measures of slump with the measures of the revers coded items (SE3,SE5,SE8,SE9,SE10), because depression and the revers coded items have similar underlying constructs. at long last the low correlation between height and self-esteem in our study strengthens our construct validity. I believe it strengthens the overall resolve because common theories of self-esteem have no reliable and valid evidence correlating the two, so we can assume that construct between the two would be low, and if our study showed a strong relationship it would be casue for questions.