The purposes of this tutorial are threefold: (a) to clarify the meaning of measurement validity, (b) to provide appropriate validation procedures for use by researchers in adapted physical activity, and (c) to raise the awareness of the limitations of the traditional views on measurement validity. Several validation procedures are described with specific examples from adapted physical activity research based on traditional approaches of providing validity evidence. Conceptual and empirical limitations of the traditional validity framework are discussed. We recommend that several categories of validity evidence should be reported in research studies. We encourage practicing the unified concept of measurement validity (Messick, 1993, 1995) in adapted physical activity research and practice.
Joonkoo Yun and Dale A. Ulrich
Ariane L. Bedimo-Rung, Jeanette Gustat, Bradley J. Tompkins, Janet Rice and Jessica Thomson
The study’s purpose is to describe the development and evaluate the reliability (inter-observer agreement) and validity (rater agreement with a gold standard) of a direct observation instrument to assess park characteristics that may be related to physical activity.
A direct observation instrument of 181 items was developed based on a conceptual model consisting of the following domains: features, condition, access, esthetics, and safety. Fifteen pairs of observers were trained and sent to two parks simultaneously to assess two Target Areas each.
Overall domain reliability was 86.9%, and overall geographic area reliability was 87.5%. Overall domain validity was 78.7% and overall geographic area validity was 81.5%.
Inter-rater reliability and validity were generally good, although validity was slightly lower than reliability. Objective items showed the highest reliability and validity. Items that are time-sensitive may need to be measured on multiple occasions, while items asking for subjective responses may require more supervised practice.
Bouwien Smits-Engelsman, Wendy Aertssen and Emmanuel Bonney
tests have received considerable attention and have been used in older children and adults as well as among sportsmen and women ( 18 ). In addition, many of these tests have been shown to have good reliability and validity in different populations ( 4 , 8 , 21 ). However, the majority of these measures
Irini Anastasiadi and George Tzetzis
The Children’s Assessment of Participation and Enjoyment (CAPE) and the Preferences for Activities of Children (PAC) are 2 measures of children’s participation in various activities. The purpose of this study was the validation of the Greek version of “CAPE & PAC.”
The questionnaires were translated and pilot tested on a sample of 25 individuals. The reliability and validity of the questionnaires were tested on 302 individuals (253 typical population, 49 disabled), 6−21 years of age. The construct validity of the instruments was examined the directional hypothesis by comparing known groups with existing differences. An exploratory factor analysis was conducted to determine the validity of the typology of activities. The reliability was examined by checking the internal consistency of the instruments.
The comparison between divergent groups confirmed the predicted differences of the mean scores and the validity of the instruments. Seven factors (categories of activities) emerged from the factor analysis. The acceptable range of Cronbach alpha for the PAC scale indicated high consistency.
This study provides evidence that partially support the validity and reliability of “CAPE & PAC” instruments to use in Greek population. Further investigation is recommended for both clinical and research purposes.
Emma L. J. Eyre, Jason Tallis, Susie Wilson, Lee Wilde, Liam Akhurst, Rildo Wanderleys and Michael J. Duncan
. For these reasons, recent focus has been placed on the validity of estimating activity intensities in children ( Chinapaw et al., 2010 ; De Vries et al., 2009 ; Lubans et al., 2011 ), older adults ( Garatachea et al., 2010 ), and, to a lesser extent, young adults ( Watson et al., 2014 ). Young
Justin A. Haegele, Ali S. Brian and Donna Wolf
Our purpose in this study was to document the criterion validity of the Fitbit Zip for measuring steps taken by youth with visual impairments (VI). A secondary purpose was to determine whether walking pace, mounting position, or relative position to the user’s mobility device impacted the criterion validity of the device. Fourteen adolescent-aged individuals (M age = 15.4; 13 male and 1 female) with VI participated in this study. Participants wore four Fitbit Zips at different mounting positions and completed two, 2-min walking trials while the lead investigator hand tallied steps. Measurement validity was analyzed using absolute percent error (APE), intraclass correlation coefficients estimated level of conformity, and paired samples t tests and Cohen’s d effect sizes assessed APE relative to mounting positions. Results supported the use of the Fitbit Zip during regular-paced walking; however, caution must be used during activities exceeding regular walking speeds, as devices consistently underestimated steps.
Fotini Venetsanou, Irene Kossyva, Nadia Valentini, Anastasia-Evangelia Afthentopoulou and Lisa Barnett
Motor Development 2nd version (TGMD-2; Ulrich, 2000 ). The strength of the PMSC, compared to previous instruments, is that it provides comprehensive information about the movement skills needed for children’s participation in sports and/or physical activity ( Barnett et al., 2015b ). The validity and
Dawn P. Gill, Gareth R. Jones, GuangYong Zou and Mark Speechley
The purpose of this study was to develop a brief physical activity interview for older adults (Phone-FITT) and evaluate its test–retest reliability and validity. Summary scores were derived for household, recreational, and total PA. Reliability was evaluated in a convenience sample from a fall-prevention study (N = 43, 79.4 ± 2.9 years, 51% male), and validity, in a random sample of individuals in older adult exercise programs (N = 48, 77.4 ± 4.7 years, 25% male). Mean time to complete the Phone-FITT was 10 min for participants sampled from exercise programs. Evaluation of test–retest reliability indicated substantial to almost perfect agreement for all scores, with intraclass correlation coefficients (95% confidence intervals) ranging from .74 (.58–.85) to .88 (.8–.94). For validity, Spearman’s rho correlations of Phone-FITT scores with accelerometer counts ranged from .29 (.01–.53) to .57 (.34–.73). Correlations of Phone-FITT recreational scores with age and seconds to complete a self-paced step test ranged from –.29 (–.53 to –.01) to –.45 (–.68 to –.14). This study contributes preliminary evidence of the reliability and validity of the Phone-FITT.
Roel De Ridder, Julien Lebleu, Tine Willems, Cedric De Blaiser, Christine Detrembleur and Philip Roosen
needed to obtain the gait parameters. This aspect is really important to facilitate technology adoption. 7 However, before using them for clinical interpretation, we need to define their reliability and validity. The latter can be done by comparing the spatiotemporal parameters of gait obtained from the
James W. Navalta, Jeffrey Montes, Nathaniel G. Bodell, Charli D. Aguilar, Ana Lujan, Gabriela Guzman, Brandi K. Kam, Jacob W. Manning and Mark DeBeliso
Groot, 2017 ; Nelson, Kaminsky, Dickin, & Montoye, 2016 ), or during flat ground walking and/or stair climbing ( An, Jones, Kang, Welk, & Lee, 2017 ; Huang, Xu, Yu, & Shull, 2016 ). These settings represent conditions that are relatively controlled. While some devices return more valid step measures