This document outlines the process and methodology for developing and validating a new scale. It discusses the objectives to assess scale development techniques and understand validity and reliability of data in scale measurements. The methodology involves 3 phases - item generation, scale development, and scale evaluation. Phase 1 involves domain identification, item generation, and expert evaluation. Phase 2 involves pre-testing questions, survey administration, and item reduction. Phase 3 involves tests of dimensionality, reliability, and validity. Statistical analyses like CFA, EFA, and reliability tests are used for scale evaluation. The document provides an example of developing a scale to measure emotional intelligence and validating it using the outlined process.

1. A
Research Proposal
On
Scale Development & Validation with Reliability -
Challenge in Homeopathic Research Journey
Dr.Anjali Upadhye
M.Sc.,M.B.A.,Ph.D.
HOD Research , Biostatistician
All India Homeopathic Scientific Seminar 2022
Submitted By ,

2. Introduction
 Scale development and validation are critical to much of the work
in the health, social, and behavioral sciences
 Our goal was to concisely review the process of scale
development in as straightforward a manner as possible,
both to facilitate the development of new, valid, and reliable
scales, and to help improve existing ones.
 To do this, we have created a primer for best practices for scale
development in measuring complex phenomena.

3. Scope of
Research
As science advances and
novel research questions
are put forth, new scales
become necessary.
Scale development is not,
however, an obvious or a
straightforward endeavor.
01
There are many steps to
scale development, there is
significant jargon within
these techniques, the work
can be costly and time
consuming, and complex
statistical analysis is often
required..
02

4. Scope of
Research
Further, many health and
behavioral science
degrees do not include
training on scale
development.
03
There are a number of
incomplete scales used to
measure mental, physical,
and behavioral attributes
that are fundamental to our
scientific inquiry .
04

5. Objectives & Hypothesis
 To assess the scale development Techniques
 To Understand Validity & reliability of Data in scale measurements
Hypothesis
H0: Scale for Emotional Quotient was not significantly reliable & valid
H1: Scale for Emotional Quotient was not significantly reliable & valid

6. Phase I :Item Generation
01
02
Domain identification
Item Generation
Specify the purpose of the domain
Confirm that there are no existing instruments
Describe the domain and provide preliminary conceptual definition
Specify the dimensions of the domain if they exist a priori
Define each dimension
Deductive methods: literature review and assessment of existing
scales
Inductive methods: exploratory research methodologies including
focus group discussions and interviews
Step 1: Identification of Domain and Item Generation: Selecting Which Items to ask

7. Phase I
01
02
Evaluation by experts
Evaluation by target population
Step 2: Content Validity: Assessing if the Items Adequately Measure the Domain of
Quantify assessments of 5-7 expert judges using formalized
scaling and statistical procedures including content validity
ratio, content validity index, or Cohen’s coefficient alpha
Conduct Delphi method with expert judges
To evaluate each item constituting the domain for
representativeness of actual experience from target population

8. Phase II :Scale Development
01
02
Step 3: Pre-testing Questions: Ensuring the Questions
and Answers Are Meaningful
Step 4: Survey Administration and Sample Size:
Gathering Enough Data from right people
Step 5: Item Reduction
03

9. Phase III :Scale Evaluation
01
02
Step 7: Tests of Dimensionality: Testing if Latent
Constructs Are as hypothised
Step 8: Tests of Reliability: Establishing if Responses Are
Consistent
Step 9: Tests of Validity: Ensuring You Measure
the Latent Dimension
03

11. indicates as to how
much control an
individual has
overadverse situations.
Control
searches the exact
reason for the
adversity and the
willingness of the
individual to take
necessary measures.
- indicates the extent
to which the trouble
affects other areas of
the individual’s life.
measures as to how long
the problem and its
effects last in individual’s
life.
Ownership Reach Endurance
ASSOCIATION BETWEEN FINAL YEAR MEDICAL STUDENT’S’ EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE
AND ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE

12. Degree of Relevance for Expert’s opinion
1 = the item is not relevant to the dimension to be measured
2 = the item is somewhat relevant to the dimension to be measured
3 = the item is quite relevant to the dimension to be measured
4 = the item is highly relevant to the dimension to be measured
Construct:

13. Dimension 1: Control
S. No Items Degree of Relevance
1 2 3 4
1 You suffer a financial setback
2 People respond unfavorably to your latest ideas of improvement
in organization
3 You personal and work obligations are out of balance.
4 You are not exercising regularly though you know you should.
5 Your computer crashed for the third time this week and you are
lagging with work and overloaded it .
Dimension 2:Ownership
S. No Items Degree of Relevance
1 2 3 4
1 You are overlooked for a promotion
2 Someone you respect always purposely ignores your attempt to
discuss an important issue.
3 You workplace is understaffed and You need more helping
hands.
4 You are upset and your colleges are counselling me to
overcome it.

14. Dimension 3: Reach
1 You are criticized for a big project that you just completed
2 The high-priority project or important meeting on which you are working
on gets canceled.
3 You hit every red light on your way to an important appointment and
getting late ...
4 You never seem to have enough money.
5 Your organization is not meeting its goals.
Dimension 4: Endurance
1 You accidentally delete an important email or You forgot about
your best friends birthday
2 You are unable to take a much-needed vacation Or Holiday
3 After extensive searching, you cannot find your an important
document.
4 You miss an important appointment.
5 Your boss adamantly disagrees with your decision.

15. EXPERT OPINION
Degree of Relevance by Experts to calculate CVR
Items Expert 1 Expert 2 Expert 3 Expert 4 Expert 5 Expert 6 Expert 7 Expert 8 Expert 9 Expert 10
DIMENSION 1:CONTROL
You suffer a financial setback 3 4 3 3 2 3 4 4 3 4
People respond unfavorably to your latest
ideas of improvement in organization
3 4 3 4 3 4 4 4 3 4
You personal and work obligations are out
of balance.
2 4 2 4 4 4 4 3 4 3
You are not exercising regularly though
you know you should.
4 4 3 4 4 3 3 4 4 3
Your computer crashed for the third time
this week and you are lagging with work
and overloaded it .
4 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 4
DIMENSION 2: OWNERSHIP
You are overlooked for a promotion 4 1 4 3 3 4 3 3 4 4
Someone you respect always purposely
ignores your attempt to discuss an important
issue.
4 1 4 4 2 3 4 4 3 4
You workplace is understaffed and You need
more helping hands.
3 4 4 3 3 4 4 4 4 3
You are upset and your colleges are
counselling me to overcome it.
3 1 4 2 3 2 4 3 4 2

16. LAWSHE’s
METHOD
Content Validity Index
Calculation by

17. LAWSHE’s
METHOD
Content Validity Index Calculation by

18. LAWSHE’s
METHOD
Content Validity Index Calculation by
Items Ne N/2
CVR=Ne-
(N/2)/(N/2)
As per LAWSHE
Table
Q1 9 5 0.80 Significant
Q2 10 5 1.00 Significant
Q3 8 5 0.60 Significant
Q4 10 5 1.00 Significant
Q5 10 5 1.00 Significant
Q6 10 5 1.00 Significant
Q7 9 5 0.80 Significant
Q8 10 5 1.00 Significant
Q9 7 5 0.40 NOT
Q10 10 5 1.00 Significant

19. CONFIRMATORY FACTOR
ANALYSIS
EXPLORATORY FACTOR
ANALYSIS
Average Variance Extracted & Convergent Validity

20. Convergent Validity
λ 2
Average Variance Extracted (AVE) & Convergent validity (CR)
Factor loading Item λ E= 1 - λ ^2 AVE CR
F1 V7 0.763 0.5824 0.4176
0.7467 2.3271
F1 V6 0.740 0.5469 0.4531
F1 V5 0.737 0.5437 0.4563
Summation 2.240 1.3271
F2 V3 0.808 0.6525 0.3475
1.8239 1.7435
F2 V10 0.788 0.6211 0.3789
F2 V9 0.599 0.3583 0.6417
F2 V8 0.507 0.2565 0.7435
Summation 2.701 0.7435
F3 V1 0.813 0.6607 0.3393
1.5124 5.9959
F3 V2 0.738 0.5453 0.4547
F3 V4 0.579 0.3350 0.6650
Summation 2.130 1.4590
λ 2

21. Discriminant Validity
λ 2
Factor AVE Square root of AVE
F1 0.747 0.8641
F2 1.824 1.3505
F3 1.512 1.2298
Factor F1 F2 F3
F1 0.864
0.576 0.484
F2 -0.399
1.3505 -0.424
F3 -0.637
0.087 1.2298

22. Internal Consistency :Reliability
Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's
Alpha
Cronbach's
Alpha Based
on
Standardized
Items
N of
Items
0.819 0.820 10

23. Confirmatory Analysis with AMOS SPSS
2017-18 2018-19 2019-20
01/03/2018 27/11/2018 07/09/2019

24. Chi Square Test

25. MODEL FIT SUMMARY

26. Conclusion
 A self-administered questionnaire was used to gather data from the
respondents. The questionnaire was divided into four dimensions .
 The reliability of the scale was established by reporting the internal
consistency and stability reliability with Crounbatch’s alpha 0.83.
 Content validity was established by computing the
 item-level scale-level content validity index (S-CVI/Ave). An I-CVI = 1 for a
panel with 10 members & it is ≥0.90 was acceptable
 By making scale development more approachable and transparent, we hope to
facilitate the advancement of our understanding of a range of health, social,
and behavioral outcomes.

27. Conclusion
 Well-designed scales are the foundation of much of our
understanding of a range of phenomena, but ensuring that
we accurately quantify what we purport to measure is not a
simple matter.
 By making scale development more approachable and
transparent, we hope to facilitate the advancement of our
understanding of a range of health, social, and behavioral
outcomes.

28. References
1. DeVellis RF. Scale Development: Theory and Application. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications (2012).
2. Raykov T, Marcoulides GA. Introduction to Psychometric Theory. New York, NY: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group (2011).
3. Streiner DL, Norman GR, Cairney J. Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use. Oxford University Press
(2015).
4. McCoach DB, Gable RK, Madura, JP. Instrument Development in the Affective Domain. School and Corporate Applications, 3rd Edn. New
York, NY: Springer (2013).
5. Morgado FFR, Meireles JFF, Neves CM, Amaral ACS, Ferreira MEC. Scale development: ten main limitations and recommendations to
improve future research practices. Psicol Reflex E Crítica (2018) 30:3. doi: 10.1186/s41155-016-0057-1
6. Glanz K, Rimer BK, Viswanath K. Health Behavior: Theory, Research, and Practice. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc (2015).
7. Ajzen I. From intentions to actions: a theory of planned behavior. In: Action Control SSSP Springer Series in Social Psychology Berlin;
Heidelberg: Springer, (1985). p. 11–39.
8. Bai Y, Peng C-YJ, Fly AD. Validation of a short questionnaire to assess mothers’ perception of workplace breastfeeding support. J Acad Nutr
Diet (2008) 108:1221–5. doi: 1
9. Hirani SAA, Karmaliani R, Christie T, Rafique G. Perceived Breastfeeding Support Assessment Tool (PBSAT): development and testing of
psychometric properties with Pakistani urban working mothers. Midwifery (2013) 29:599–607. doi: 10.1016/j.midw.2012. 05.003
10.Boateng GO, Martin S., Collins S, Natamba BK, Young SL. Measuring exclusive breastfeeding social support: scale development and
validation in Uganda. Matern Child Nutr. (2018). doi: 10.1111/mcn.12579. [Epub ahead of print].
11.Arbach A, Natamba BK, Achan J, Griffiths JK, Stoltzfus RJ, Mehta S, et al. Reliability and validity of the center for epidemiologic studies-
depression scale in screening for depression among HIV-infected and -uninfected pregnant women attending antenatal services in
northern Uganda: a cross-sectional study. BMC Psychiatry (2014) 14:303. doi: 10.1186/s12888-014-0303-y
12.Natamba BK, Kilama H, Arbach A, Achan J, Griffiths JK, Young SL. Reliability and validity of an individually focused food insecurity access
scale for assessing inadequate access to food among pregnant Ugandan women of mixed HIV status. Public Health Nutr. (2015) 18:2895–905.
doi: 10.1017/S1368980014001669
13.Neilands TB, Chakravarty D, Darbes LA, Beougher SC, Hoff CC. Development and validation of the sexual agreement investment scale. J Sex
Res. (2010) 47:24–37. doi: 10.1080/00224490902916017
0.1016/j.jada.2008.04.018

29. MY PUBLICATIONS

30. Support Hand for Research
Take a Opportunity to
Develop a New Scale of
Your Own Name with
Proper Publication
CONTACT :
9922494537
dranjaliupadhye.com
statsanjal@gmail.com

31. THANK
YOU