Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T15:15:12.022Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Content Validity and Metric Properties of a Pool of Items Developed to Assess Humor Appreciation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 January 2013

Hugo Carretero-Dios ,
Cristino Pérez  and
Gualberto Buela-Casal
Hugo Carretero-Dios*
Affiliation:
Universidad de Granada (Spain)
Cristino Pérez
Affiliation:
Universidad de Granada (Spain)
Gualberto Buela-Casal
Affiliation:
Universidad de Granada (Spain)
*
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Hugo Carretero Dios. Facultad de Psicología, Campus Cart 18071 Granada (Spain). Phone: +34-958246273. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This research deals with assessing humor appreciation and highlights some of the strategies that can be used in two necessary stages in the construction of a test: the content validity study and the item analysis. First, we analyzed the content validity of a battery of 200 items developed to assess humor appreciation. Second, we analyzed the metric properties of the selected items by means of two studies. The first study was a pre-pilot analysis of the items in a sample of 212 participants, and the second study was a new item analysis in a sample of 344 Spanish people aged between 18 and 71 years. To determine content validity, we calculated interjudge agreement on item-facet theoretical match. Each item was assessed by seven judges, and the selection criterion used was a minimum agreement of 70%. This procedure led to eliminating 27 items.

Subsequent item analyses led to a preliminary proposal for a 40-item scale (Escala de Apreciación del Humor, EAHU [Humor Appreciation Scale]) with appropriate descriptive statistics as well as discrimination and homogeneity values. The internal empirical structure of the scale matched the operative definition of humor appreciation, and the Cronbach’s alpha of the EAHU scores ranged from .72 to .89.

El presente estudio aborda la problemática de la valuación de la apreciación del humor, a la vez que se pormenorizan algunas de las estrategias que pueden usarse dentro de dos de las fases de necesaria ejecución dentro de todo proceso de construcción de un test: el estudio de la validez de contenido y en el análisis de ítems. En primer lugar, se analizó la validez de contenido de una batería de 200 ítems desarrollada para evaluar la apreciación del humor. En segundo, y a través de dos estudios independientes, se analizaron las propiedades métricas de los ítems seleccionados. El primer estudio se trató de un análisis pre-piloto de los ítems a través de una muestra de 212 participantes, y el segundo fue el análisis de ítems propiamente dicho a partir de una muestra de 344 participantes españoles con edades comprendidas entre los 18 y los 71 años. Para determinar la validez de contenido se calculó el acuerdo inter-jueces sobre el gado de pertenencia teórica item-faceta. Cada ítem fue evaluado por siete jueces y el criterio de selección se baso en un nivel de acuerdo mínimo del 70%. Este procedimiento condujo a la eliminación de 27 ítems. Los consiguientes análisis de ítems derivaron en una propuesta de escala preliminar de 40 ítems (Escala de Apreciación del Humor, EAHU) caracterizados por presentar unos adecuados estadísticos descriptivos a la vez que unos valores de discriminación y homogeneidad apropiados. De igual forma, la estructura interna de la escala se correspondió con la definición operativa de la apreciación del humor, presentando los distintos factores valores alfa de Cronbach que oscilaron entre 0,72 y 0,89.

Keywords

humor appreciationcontent validityitem analysistest constructionEAHUapreciación del humorvalidez de contenidoanálisis de ítemsconstrucción de testsEAHU
Type
Research Article
Information
The Spanish Journal of Psychology , Volume 12 , Issue 2 , November 2009 , pp. 773 - 787
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

AERA, APA & NCME. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological tests. Washington DC: American Psychological Association, American Educational research Association, National Council on Measurement in Education.Google Scholar
Beck, C.T., & Gable, R.K. (2001). Ensuring content validity: An illustration of the process. Journal of Nursing Measurement, 9, 201–215.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bing, J. (2007). Liberated jokes: sexual humor in all-female groups. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 20, 337–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bozikas, V.P., Kosmidis, M.H., Tonia, T., Garyfallos, G., Focas, K., & Karavatos, A. (2007). Humor Appreciation in remitted Patients with Bipolar Disorder. Journal of Nervous & Mental Disease, 195, 773–775.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carretero-Dios, H., & Pérez, C. (2005). Normas para el desarrollo y revisión de estudios instrumentales [Standards for the development and review of instrumental studies]. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 5, 521–551.Google Scholar
Carretero-Dios, H., & Pérez, C. (2007). Standards for the development and review of instrumental studies: considerations about test selection in psychological research. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 7, 863–882.Google Scholar
Carretero-Dios, H., Pérez, C., & Buela-Casal, G. (2006). Dimensiones de la apreciación del humor [Dimensions of humor appreciation]. Psicothema, 18, 465–470.Google Scholar
Cattell, R.B., & Luborsky, L.B. (1947). Personality factors in response to humor. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 42, 402–421.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cattell, R.B., & Tollefson, D.L. (1966). The IPAT humor test of personality. Champaign, IL: Institute for Personality and Ability Testing.Google Scholar
Clark, L.A., & Watson, D. (2003). Constructing validity: Basic issues in objective scale development. In Kazdin, A.E. (ed.), Methodological issues & strategies in clinical research (3rd ed.) (pp. 207–231). Washington, D.C.: APA.Google Scholar
Crocker, L., Llabre, M., & Miller, M.D. (1988). The Generalizability of Content Validity ratings. Journal of Educational Measurement, 25, 287–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eysenck, H.J. (1943). An experimental analysis of five tests of “appreciation of humor”. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 3, 191–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eyssel, F., & Bohner, G. (2007). The rating of Sexist Humor Under Time Pressure as an Indicator of Spontaneous Sexist Attitudes. Sex Roles, 57, 651–660.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ford, T.E., Boxer, C.F., Armstrong, J., & Edel, J.R. (2008). More than Just a Joke: The Prejudice-releasing Function of Sexist Humor. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 159–170.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Galloway, G., & Chirico, D. (2008). Personality and humor appreciation: evidence of an association between trait neuroticism and preferences for structural features of humor. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 21, 129–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gordon, J. (2004). Developing and improving assessment instruments. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 11, 243–245.Google Scholar
Grant, J.S., & Davis, L.L. (1997). Selection and Use of Content Experts for Instrument Development. Research in Nursing & Health, 20, 269–274.3.0.CO;2-G>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Haladyma, T. (2004). Developing and validating multiple-choice test items. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haynes, S.N., Richard, D.C.S., & Kubany, E.S. (1995). Content validity in psychological assessment: a functional approach to concepts and methods. Psychological Assessment, 7, 238–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henrysson, S. (1971). Gathering, analyzing and using data on test items. In Thorndike, R.L. (ed.), Educational Measurement (2ª ed.) Washington, DC: American Council on Education.Google Scholar
Henson, R., & Douglas, J. (2005). Test Construction for Cognitive Diagnosis. Applied Psychological Measurement, 29, 262–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herzog, T.R. (1999). Gender differences in humor appreciation revisted. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research 12, 411–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, D.N. (1970). A sequential system for personality scale development. In Spielberger, C.D. (ed.), Current topics in clinical and community psychology (vol. 2) (pp. 61–96). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Lord, F.M., & Novick, M.R. (1968). Statistical theories of mental test scores. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.Google Scholar
Martínez-Arias, R. (1995). Psicometría: teoría de los test psicológicos y educativos [Psychometry: theory of educational and psychological tests]. Madrid: Síntesis.Google Scholar
Mastaglia, B., Toye, C., & Kristjanson, L.J. (2003). Ensuring content validity in instrument development: Challlenges and innovative approaches. Contemporary Nurse 14, 281–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGhee, P.E., Ruch, W., & Hehl, F.J. (1990). A personality-based model of humor development during adulthood. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 3, 119–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muñiz, J., Hidalgo, A.M., García-Cueto, E., Martínez, R., & Moreno, R. (2005). Análisis de ítems [Item analysis]. Madrid: La Muralla.Google Scholar
Nunnally, J.C., & Bernstein, I.J. (1995). Psychometric Theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Osterlind, S.J. (1989). Constructing Test Items. London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Polit, D., Beck, C.T., & Owen, S. (2007). Is the CVI an acceptable indicator of content validity? Research in Nursing & Health, 30, 459–467.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rubio, D.M., Berg-Weger, M., Tebb, S.S., Lee, E.S., & Rauch, S. (2003). Objectifying content validity: Conducting a content validity study in social work research. Social Work Research, 27, 94–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruch, W. (1992). Assessment of appreciation of humor: Studies with the 3 WD humor test. In Spielberger, C.D. and Butcher, J.M. (eds.), Advances in personality assessment, (pp. 27–75). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Ruch, W., & Hehl, F.J. (1986). Conservatism as a predictor of responses to humour-I. A comparison of four scales. Personality and Individual Differences, 7, 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruch, W., & Hehl, F.J. (1998). A two-model of humor appreciation: Its relation to aesthetic appreciation and simplicity-complexity of personality. In Ruch, W. (ed.), The sense of humor: Explorations of a personality characteristic (pp. 109–142). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samson, A.C., & Huber, O. (2007). The interaction of cartoonist's gender and formal features of cartoons. Humor: International Journal of Humor Research, 20, 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sireci, S.G. (1998). Gathering and analyzing content validity data. Educational Assessment, 5, 299–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, G.T., Fischer, S., & Fister, S.M. (2003). Incremental validity principles in test construction. Psychological Assessment, 15, 467–477.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spaan, M. (2006). Test and item specifications development. Language Assessment Quarterly, 3, 71–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wynd, C.A., Schmidt, B., & Atkins-Schaefer, M. (2003). Two quantitative approaches for estimating instrument content validity. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 25, 508–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar