Explore the vast range of titles available.

Numerous overlapping and inconsistent views of academicians and practitioners on construct of employee engagement have led to the development of various measurement instruments that differ in terms of the variables. The article attempts to develop an assessment instrument and to assess content validity of the proposed variables/dimensions. The construct is generated through grounded theory method, conducting structured interviews of human resource heads (15 best firms). The assessment of content validity is done through six domain experts. Content validity index, Kappa statistic, and content validity ratio (Lawshe test) were implemented for content validity. Three dimensions (alignment, affective, and action-oriented) having 10 items each were identified. The item content validity index (I-CVI) ranged from 0.66 to 1 and scale content validity index (S-CVI/Ave) ranged from 0.848 to 0.932. The instrument is assessed with high content validity. It bridges the research gap of incongruity among academic and industry. The next step of research will involve testing of this instrument for psychometric properties and testing its comprehensiveness for respondents.

Purpose Establishing content validity for both new and existing patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures is central to a scientifically sound instrument development process. Methodological and logistical issues present a challenge in regard to determining the best practices for establishing content validity. Methods This paper provides an overview of the current state of knowledge regarding qualitative research to establish content validity based on the scientific methodological literature and authors' experience. Results Conceptual issues and frameworks for qualitative interview research, developing the interview discussion guide, reaching saturation, analysis of data, developing a theoretical model, item generation and cognitive debriefing are presented. Suggestions are offered for dealing with logistical issues regarding facilitator qualifications, ethics approval, sample recruitment, group logistics, taping and transcribing interviews, honoraria and documenting content validity. Conclusions It is hoped this paper will stimulate further discussion regarding best practices for establishing content validity so that, as the PRO field moves forward, qualitative research can be evaluated for quality and acceptability according to scientifically established principles.

Mental imagery (MI) is a psychological technique traditionally applied outside exercise contexts. However, recent studies indicate its potential benefits during physical activity, particularly for enhancing positive emotions and self-regulation of exercise behavior. While existing questionnaires capture aspects of MI regarding the exercise, none are specifically designed to evaluate MI during training. Therefore, it is necessary to create a new questionnaire. Establishing its content validity (CV) is the initial step in this process. Despite its importance for subsequent validity assessments and the reliability of the measurement instrument, CV is often overlooked or superficially addressed, possibly owing to a lack of comprehensive guidelines. In response to these needs, the aim of this study was to develop the \"Imagery during Exercise Questionnaire-Gym Version\" (IdEQ-GV) to assess the functions of MI during exercise and to measure its CV. This study also provides a step-by-step presentation of the content validation process. The development of the IdEQ-GV involved instrument design and judgmental evidence from academic experts and lay experts (i.e., potential research subjects). The first version of the questionnaire, consisting of 34 items across 6 dimensions, was assessed by three content experts who evaluated its CV in terms of relevance, essentiality, clarity, and comprehensiveness and provided feedback. The second version, comprising 28 items across 5 dimensions, was re-evaluated by content experts and discussed in cognitive interviews with 13 gym members, who also provided feedback and scores regarding comprehensibility and comprehensiveness. After making the necessary modifications, the third version of the IdEQ-GV, containing 24 items, was evaluated by a new sample of 20 exercisers for comprehensibility. The methods used to quantify CV included the content validity index (CVI), the scale-level CVI (S-CVI), which comprises the average CVI (S-CVI/Ave) and universal agreement (UA) among experts (S-CVI/UA), and the content validity ratio (CVR). The IdEQ-GV was found to have an excellent CV regarding relevance, with an S-CVI/UA of 1.00. For clarity, the S-CVI/Ave was 0.95. For essentiality, the average CVR of the scale was 0.83. For comprehensiveness, according to the content experts' scores, the S-CVI/Ave was 0.93, while the first sample of exercisers gave it a perfect score. Regarding comprehensibility, the final sample of exercisers rated the SCVI/Ave at 0.93. Through this analytical process, it has been established that the IdEQ-GV has excellent content validity and is now ready for widespread distribution to establish additional psychometric properties.

The role of knowledge and its sources in the academic field is central to cognition and action. The present research provides a theoretical and methodological viewpoint on evaluating sources of knowledge. This article presents a novel model and method for studying the epistemological attitudes (EAs) of academics toward sources of knowledge. The EA is an epistemological phenomenon and mechanism presenting the cognition of knowledge sources as a process occurring in epistemological, contextual, and subjective realms. Adhering to the model, the EA incorporates four concepts that embody the epistemological strategy and epistemological approach for knowledge acquisition, the context of relevant usage, the motivation for utilizing the source, and the inherent personal value acquired. Based on the model, a new method has been developed to study the sources of knowledge used by academics and represent their constructs. The development process consisted of three stages: formal, substantive, and procedural. In the formal and substantive stages, the content and methodology were developed, and in the procedural stage, the appropriateness of the content was assessed by adapting the expert review approach. A panel of seven experts comprising university academics and subject-matter experts in philosophy, methodology, education research, and psychology participated in the expert review study. The results present the experts’ analysis of the method regarding the content validity index (CVI). A questionnaire that explores academics’ EAs toward various sources of knowledge has been developed. The method reflects how well knowledge sources transfer objective and meta-knowledge dimensions. These help determine essential sources for education, research, and science.

Leadership Vulnerability has garnered increasing attention in recent years from scholars and practitioners. However, the research in this field is still in its infancy and requires attention from academicians and researchers. The studies exploring vulnerability are mostly general without giving much consideration to the conceptualization of leadership vulnerability and only a few have attempted to include it in empirical studies. To fill this research gap, we have used the grounded theory approach to get an in-depth understanding of the concept of leadership vulnerability and to develop the content validity of the instrument that is deeply rooted in the data. Subsequently, the concepts emerging from grounded theory were positioned in the literature and then finally were assessed for content validity through a panel of experts using CVR, I-CVI, S-CVI, and Kappa statistics. The findings of the paper provide a valuable addition to the theory and practice on leadership by conceptualizing leadership vulnerability and suggesting an instrument for its measurement for researchers and practitioners.

Background Implementation of person-centred care (PCC) is a challenging undertaking. Thus, a call has been issued for a robust and generic instrument to measure and enable evaluation of PCC across settings and patient groups. This study aimed to develop a generic questionnaire measuring patients’ perceptions of PCC. Further aims were to evaluate its content and measurement properties using a mixed-methods approach entailing Rasch and qualitative content analyses. Methods The study was conducted in three iterative phases. Phase one included six key informants to gain a broad view of the concept. Phase two entailed a Delphi study involving two rounds with eight experts who generated ratings on relevance, readability, comprehensiveness and suggestions for revision. Data were analysed using the Item Content Validity Index in conjunction with qualitative comments to improve the questionnaire. Phase three was performed using a mixed-methods design. Quantitative data were collected from patients ( n  = 553) responding to the questionnaire who were recruited from six in- and outpatient care units in a health care region in Sweden. Data was analysed using the Rasch measurement model. Qualitative data were based on the respondents’ free-text comments, cognitive interviews ( n  = 10) and field notes, and then analysed with deductive content analysis. Results A questionnaire was developed and operationalised based on the information given by key informants in phase one and then validated for its content by experts in phase two. In phase three Rasch analyses revealed problems with targeting, thresholds and two misfitting items. These problems were corroborated by data from the qualitative analyses, which also revealed some issues of wording and interpretation of items. When thresholds were resolved and two items removed, the questionnaire met the assumptions of the Rasch model. Conclusions Experts gave the questionnaire content high ratings and it met measurement requirements assumed by the Rasch model after revisions. Those problems on targeting that remain need to be addressed in future studies. Meanwhile, we regard the questionnaire as of sufficient quality to be useful in benchmarking PCC.

Firm resilience is a critical concept for organisations aiming to navigate disruptions effectively, yet its translation into regularly applicable metrics remains underdeveloped. Thus, existing frameworks often lack systematic validation and fail to capture resilience’s dynamic nature across various disruptions, hindering managers’ confident implementation of resilience strategies. This study aims to identify a content-valid and practical metric for measuring firm resilience, applicable across diverse firm contexts and disruptions. The research evaluates and compares existing metrics, based on their alignment with a newly proposed axiom system, to identify the most suitable measure for assessing firm resilience in post-disruption contexts. The metric assessment revealed that the Dominance axiom posed the greatest challenge, with only two metrics fully satisfying the requirement. The semi-quantitative Likert scales encountered further issues with the Operationalisation axiom because of their unsettled interpretation as either ordinal or interval scales, a problem not observed with purely quantitative metrics. The BRAVE metric emerged as the most reliable for evaluating firm resilience, owing to its flexibility in accommodating varying time horizons. Future research should test the metric in real-world settings and explore potential simplifications or additional axioms to refine the resilience measurement framework.

Effectiveness can be assessed in terms of achievability of objectives. Teaching process at higher education level aims at students' cognitive, psychomotor and effective development so that university graduates could become effective members of society after completion of their studies. Purpose of education can never be achieved without teachers. It can safely be said that effectiveness of education system largely depends on effectiveness of its teachers. Accountability or teacher evaluation helps ensure teaching effectiveness. Therefore, this study aimed at construction of such a scale which could be used to assess university teachers' teaching effectiveness. For preparing Teaching Effectiveness Scale (TES), primarily, 65 statements were prepared as an item pool after literature review related to capabilities of efficient and effective teacher. Items were extracted from literature review (i.e., contemporary scales for teacher evaluation), informal interviews with ten university teachers and focus group discussions with three intact groups of graduates were held. Later on, 16 Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) judged the content validity. Content Validity Index (CVI) and Content Validity Ratio (CVR) were calculated to retain 43 content valid items. Finally, these 43 items were administered to 698 university students. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was performed on LISREL 8.8. to ensure construct validity. Finally, there remained 32 items whose factor loadings were more than 0.40. Reliability Coefficient Value (RCV) was high (r= 0.87). In this way, TES comprised four sub scales i.e. (a) Classroom Management (CM), (b) content and pedagogical skills, (c) Facilitative Classroom Environment (FCE) and (d) Student Teacher Relationship (STR). The scale possesses high psychometric properties and is available for use.

This article aims to assist educators and researchers in determining content validity (CV) and reporting a content validity index (CVI) for simulation scenarios. Educators and researchers involved in health care curricula may not recognize the need to validate and/or do not know how to validate a simulation scenario. Two methods based on previous research that can be used to determine CV and report a CVI are discussed (Lynn and Lawshe). Simulation scenarios need to be written so experts can fully understand the entirety of content and accurately assess whether items are relevant. Information for a CV template for experts is provided. Determining item CV and reporting an overall CVI are important elements necessary to simulation scenarios, especially when the scenario is used in a high-stakes assessment or research.

Introduction: The assessment of mediator components of behavior change based on the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) can be carried out with a questionnaire instrument. Meanwhile, the questionnaire to assess the mediator of adolescents’ balanced dietary behavior in post-disaster areas has not yet been developed. Failure to recognize nutritional problems in this period can increase morbidity and mortality. Therefore, this present study attempts to provide the overview of the implementation of content and face validity as well as reliability of the TPB questionnaire on the balanced dietary behavior of adolescents in the post-disaster area by taking a study case in Palu City, Central Sulawesi, Indonesia.Methods: By involving nine expert panelists, the content validity was conducted qualitatively and quantitatively by calculating the Content Validity Index (CVI) and Kappa statistics scores. Face validity was conducted qualitatively by interviewing ten adolescents’. Meanwhile, Cronbach’s Coefficient Alpha was calculated to measure the reliability by interviewing 30 adolescents aged 15–17 years old living in the disaster site with their mothers during the massive disaster in 2018.Results: The results showed that the Item CVI and the kappa statistics scores were between 0.75 and 1 and 0.72 and 1, respectively. The final version of the questionnaire was resolved based on the panelists’ recommendation, the face validity’s findings, and the results of the questionnaire reliability assessment. There were 14 items of attitude, 12 items of subjective norms, 17 items of behavioral control, and eight items of intention components with acceptable questionnaire reliabilities.Conclusion: Overall, the TPB questionnaire on the balanced dietary behavior of adolescents has excellent validity and reliability to measure the mediator of balanced dietary behavior changes of adolescents.