Help! I Can’t Find a Measuring Instrument for My Research: Designing Measuring Instruments from Scratch


Alida Naudé
Postdoctoral Student and Audiologist, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa

Juan Bornman
University of Pretoria

BISAC: TEC022000

This book provides the reader with a systematic approach for designing and developing a new measuring instrument. The focus is on offering new creative options for data collection during the development stage of the instrument. These alternative methods for data collection are explained by providing the rationale thereof as well as practical examples of how to apply these methods. Social medical platforms have opened many alternatives to the traditional way of data collection to develop valid and reliable measuring instruments. Advantages and disadvantages of different methods will be highlighted, as along with pitfalls and ethical concerns that researchers should be aware of.

While many researchers may not be interested in measurement per se, they often must find ways of studying important questions where existing scales are either inadequate, inappropriate or unavailable. In conclusion, the proposed publication will guide the reader through key indicators of the quality of a measuring instrument, with a specific focus on the validations process and reducing error in the measuring process. The target audience for this book includes postgraduate students, early career researchers and professionals in the therapeutic and caring sciences (occupation therapy, physiotherapy, speech-language pathology, audiology, dietetics, social work, nursing, dentistry, etc.), and educators involved in extensive research that necessitates the development of a new measuring instrument. The academic level ranges from novice to intermediate levels.

Table of Contents

Table of Contents




About the Authors

About the Peer Reviewers

Chapter 1. Searching the Literature

Chapter 2. Using Focus Groups

Chapter 3. Using In-Depth Interviews

Chapter 4. Using Social Media

Chapter 5. Using Expert Panels

Chapter 6. Validity and Reliability of Measuring Instruments

Chapter 7. Conclusion, Critical Evaluation and New Directions



Chapter 1

Bastos, J. L., Duquia, R. P., Gonzáles-Chica, D. A., Mesa, J. M., & Bonamigo, R.R. (2014). Field work I: Selecting the instrument for data collection. Anais Brasileiros de Dermatologia, 89(6), 918-923.
Boeker, M., Vach, W., & Motschall, E. (2013). Google Scholar as replacement for systematic literature searches: Good relative recall and precision are not enough. BM Medical Research Methodology, 13, 131.
Cooper, H. (2010). Research synthesis and meta-analysis: A step-by-step approach, 4th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Cronback, L., & Meehl, P. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 53(4), 281–302.
Ecker, E. D., & Skelly, A. C. (2010). Conducting a winning literature search. Evidence-Based Spine-Care Journal, 1(1),
Greyvenstein, I., 2017. Higher order emotion identification: Comparing children with blindness to typically developing peers. Unpublished PhD thesis.Johanson-Seberd, B., & Wilkins, J. (2010). The uses and implications of the term retarded on youtube. Review of Disability Studies: An International Journal, 6(4), 47.Kincaid, J. P., Fishburne, R. P., Rogers, R. L., & Chissom, B. S. (1975). Derivation of new readability formulas (Automated Readability Index, Fog Count and Flesch Reading Ease Formula) for Navy enlisted personnel. Research Branch Report, February, 8-75. Millington, TN: Naval Technical Training, U. S. Naval Air Station, Memphis, TN.
Mastel, K., Morris-Knower, J., & Marsalis, S. (2016). Locating Tests and Measurement Instruments for Assessment. Journal of Extension, 54(4), TOT6.
Siva, S. (2009). Optimal strategies for literature search. Indian Journal of Urology, 25(2), 246-250.

Chapter 2

Banajee, M., DiCarlo, C., & Buras-Stricklin, S. (2003). Core vocabulary determination for toddlers. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 2, 67–73.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2012). Thematic analysis. In H. Cooper, P. Camic, D. Long, A. Panter, D. Rindskopf, & K. Sher (Eds.), APA handbook of research methods in psychology, Vol. 2: Research designs: Quantitative, qualitative, neuropsycho-logical, and biological (pp. 57–71). Washington, DC: American psychological association.
Comley, P., & Beaumont, J. (2011). Online research: Methods, benefits and issues, Part 2. Journal of Direct, Data and Digital Marketing Practice, 13(1), 25–39.
Dowling, M. (2008). ATLAS.ti (Software). In L. Given (Ed.), The SAGE encyclopedia of qualitative research methods (pp. 37–38). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
Fern, E. (2001). Advanced focus group research. Thousand Oaks, United Kingdom: Sage Publications, Inc.
Greenwald, M., Jacobson, K., Perlman, B., Elmlinger, A., Ferrari, R., Greenwald, L., … Wishinsky, L. (2015). Post-retirement experiences of individuals retired for 15 years or more: A report on twelve focus groups and fifteen in-depth interviews in the United States and Canada. United States, Canada.
Halcomb, E., & Davidson, P. (2006). Is verbatim transcription of interview data always necessary? Applied Nursing Research, 19, 38–42.
Hughes, D., & DuMont, K. (1993). Using focus groups to facilitate culturally anchored research. American Journal of Community Psychology, 21(6), 775–806.
Johnson, E. (2015). An exploration of the common pain-related vocabulary typically developing children use : implications for children who use augmentative and alternative communication. University of Pretoria. Retrieved from
Johnson, E., Nilsson, S., & Adolfsson, M. (2015). Eina! Ouch! Eish! Professionals’ Perceptions of How Children with Cerebral Palsy Communicate About Pain in South African School Settings: Implications for the use of AAC. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 31(4), 325–335.
Kidd, P., & Parshall, M. (2000). Getting the focus and the group: enhancing analytical rigor in focus group research. Qualitative Health Research, 10(3), 293–308.
Kraus, M., & Mendes, W. (2014). Sartorial symbols of social class elicit class-consistent behavioral and physiological responses: A dyadic approach. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 143(6), 2330–2340. Retrieved from
Krueger, R. (2014). Developing questions for focus groups: focus group kit (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks: California: Sage Publications, Inc.
Krueger, R. (2015). Moderating Focus Groups (Online). SAGE Publications, Inc.
Krueger, R., & Casey, M. (2015). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research (5th ed.). Singapore: SAGE Publications, Inc.
MacLean, L., Meyer, M., & Estable, A. (2004). Improving accuracy of transcripts in qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research, 14(1), 113–123.
Rathbone, L. (2016). The effect of a sexuality training programme on the knowledge and attitudes of caregivers working with women with intellectual disabilities who live in residential care facilities: a social story approach. University of Pretoria. Retrieved from
Smithson, J. (2000). Using and analysing focus groups: Limitations and possibilities. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 3(2), 103–119.
Stemler, S. (2001). An overview of content analysis. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation, 7(17). Retrieved from
Stewart, D., & Shamdasani, P. (1990). Focus Groups: Theory and Practice. London: SAGE Publications.
Tonkiss, F. (2004). Using focus groups. In C. Seale (Ed.), Researching society and culture (2nd ed., pp. 193–206). London: Sage publications.
Weinreich, N. (2011). Hands-on social marketing: A step-by-step guide to designing change for good. (2nd ed.). London: SAGE Publications, Inc.
Wellard, S., & McKenna, L. (2001). Turning tapes into text: Issues surrounding the transcription of interviews. Contemporary Nurse, 11(2/3), 180–186.

Chapter 3

Bernard, H. (2011). Research methods in anthropology: Qualitative and quantitave approaches (5th ed.). Lanham, MD: Rowman Altamira.
Berry, R. S. Y. (1999). Collecting data by in-depth interviewing. Paper presented at the British Educational Research Association Annual Conference, University of Sussex at Brighton, September 2 – 5 1999.
Bornman, J., Sevcik, R., Romski, M. A., & Pae, H. K. (2010). Successfully translating language and culture when adapting assessment measures. Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities, 7(2), 111-118.
Boyce, C., & Neale, P. (2006). Conducting in-depth interviews: A Guide for Designing and Conducting In-Depth Interviews for Evaluation Input. Pathfinder International Tool Series: Monitoring and Evaluation – 2. Retrieved from http://dmefor
Essays, UK. (November 2013). Advantages and Disadvantages of In-depth Interviews. Psychology Essay. Retrieved from cref=1
Fryer, C., Mackintosh, S., Stanley, M., & Crichton, J. (2011). Qualitative studies using in-depth interviews with older people from multiple language groups: Methodological systematic review. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 68(1), 22–35. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2011.05719.x.
George, K. (2010). 9 Reasons to Choose In-Depth Interviews (IDIs)|Market Research in Upstate NY. Retrieved from
Hennink, M. M. (2008). Language and communication in cross-cultural qualitative research. In P. Liamputtong (Ed.). Cross-cultural Research: Ethical and Methodological Perspectives (pp. 21-34). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
Hitchcock, G., & Hughes, D. (1989). Research and the Teacher: A Qualitative Introduction to School-based Research. London: Routledge.
Jamshed, S. (2014). Qualitative research method-interviewing and observation. Journal of Basic and Clinical Pharmacy, 5(4), 87–88. doi: 10.4103/0976-0105.141942.
Johnson, E. (2015). An exploration of the common pain-related vocabulary typically-developing children use: Implications for children who use AAC. (Doctoral thesis, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa). Retrieved from
Kvale, S. (1996). Interviews: An Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing. London: Sage Publications.
Naudé, A. M. (2015). Exploring ethical sensitivity in the South African context: developing and implementing a measure in the therapeutic sciences. (Doctoral thesis, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa). Retrieved from
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research and evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Rossi, C.C., Reynolds, W., & Nelson, R.M. (2003). Child Assent and Parental Permission in Pediatric Research. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics, 24(2), 131–148.
Sarantakos, S. (2012). Social research (4th ed.). Hong Kong: Palgrave Macmillan.

Chapter 4

Academia Obscura (2014). 11 Essential Hashtags for Academics. Retrieved from (2009). Alexa toolbar. California: Alexa Internet, Inc.
Boyd, D., & Ellison, N. (2007). Social Network Sites: Definition, History, and Scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), 210–230.
Bruns, A., & Stieglitz, S. (2012). Quantitative approaches to comparing communication patterns on Twitter. Journal of Technology in Human Services. Journal of Technology in Human Services, 30(3–4), 160–185.
Bruns, A., & Stieglitz, S. (2014). Metrics for understanding communication on Twitter. In K. Weller, A. Bruns, J. Burgess, M. Mahrt, & C. Puschmann (Eds.), Twitter and society (pp. 69–82). New York: Peter Lang.
Bryen, D. (2016). Ethical Issues in Conducting Research Involving Persons with Disability: A View from the Past and Some New Challenges. Humanities and Social Sciences, 4(2–1), 53–59.
Cann, A., Dimitriou, K., & Hooley, T. (2011). Social media: A guide for researchers. London: Research Information Network. Retrieved from
Comley, P., & Beaumont, J. (2011). Online market research: Methods, benefits and issues – Part 1. Journal of Direct, Data and Digital Marketing Practices, 12(4), 315–327.
Creswell, J., & Plano Cark, V. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (2nd ed.). USA: Sage Publicatoins, Inc.
Cycyota, C., & Harrison, D. (2006). What (not) to expect when surveying executives. Organizational Research Methods, 9, 133–160.
Doran, G. (1981). There’s a S.M.A.R.T. Way to Write Management’s Goals and Objectives. Management Review, 70(11), 35–36.
Ebbert, J., Dupras, D., & Erwin, P. (2003). Searching the medical literature using PubMed: A tutorial. Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 78(1), 87–91.
Egan, K., & Moreno, M. (2011). Alcohol References on Undergraduate Males’ Facebook Profiles. American Journal of Men’s Health, March (Online), 1–8. 10.1177/1557988310394341.
Ellison, N., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The Benefits of Facebook “Friends:” Social Capital and College Students’ Use of Online Social Network Sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(4), 1143–1168.
Feinberg, J. (2010). Wordle. In J. Steele & N. Iliinsky (Eds.), Beautiful Visualization: Looking at Data Through the Eyes of Experts (pp. 37–58). Canada: O’Reilly Media, Inc.
Fielding, N., Lee, R., & Blank, G. (2008). The Sage Handbook of Online Research Methods. Sage publications.
Grewal, A., Kataria, H., & Dhawan, I. (2016). Literature search for research planning and identification of research problem. Indian Journal of Anaesthesia, 60(9), 635–639.
Horrell, B., Stephens, C., & Breheny, M. (2015). Online research with informal caregivers: Opportunities and challenges. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 12(3), 258–271.
Housley, W., Procter, R., Edwards, A., Burnap, P., Williams, M., Sloan, L., … Greenhill, A. (2014). Big and broad social data and the sociological imagination: A collaborative response. Big Data & Society, 1(2), 1–15.
Hynan, A., Goldbart, J., & Murray, J. (2015). A grounded theory of Internet and social media use by young people who use augmentative and alternative communication (AAC). Disability and Rehabilitation, 37(17), 1559–1575. Retrieved from
Johnson, B., Dunlap, E., & Benoit, E. (2010). Structured Qualitative Research: Organizing “Mountains of Words” for Data Analysis, both Qualitative and Quantitative. Substance Use and Misuse, 45(5), 648–670.
Kemp, S. (2017). Global Digital Report. New York, NY. Retrieved from
Kennedy, K. (2014). A short course in searching the literature: A basic introduction to developing a search strategy, database hints, and executing a search. University of South Australia: International Centre for Allied Health Evidence.
Lenhart, A., Purcell, K., Smith, A., & Zickuhr, K. (2010). Social Media & Mobile Internet Use Among Teens and Young Adults. Washington, DC. Retrieved from
Lewis, K., Kaufman, J., & Christakis, N. (2008). The Taste for Privacy: An Analysis of College Student Privacy Settings in an Online Social Network. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14(1), 79–100.
Lobe, B., Livingstone, S., Olafsson, K. & Simões, J.A. (2008). Best Practice Research Guide: How to research children and online technologies in comparative perspective.
EU Kids Online (Deliverable D4.2). Available on
Mauri, M., Cipresso, P., Balgera, A., Villarmira, M., & Riva, G. (2011). Why is Facebook so successful? Psychophysiological measures describe a core flow state while using Facebook. Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking, 14(12), 723–731.
Milan, S. (2013). Social movements and their technologies: Wiring social change. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Miller, L. A. (2011). Social media: friend and foe. The Journal of Perinatal and Neonatal Nursing, 25(4), 307-309.
Moreno, M., Goniu, N., Moreno, P., & Diekema, D. (2013). Ethics of social media research: Common concerns and practical considerations. Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking, 16(9), 708–713.
Muise, A., Christofides, E., & Desmarais, S. (2009). More information than you ever wanted: Does Facebook bring out the green-eyed monster of jealousy? Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 12(4), 441–444.
Murphy, R. (2013). Using social media to enable qualitative research. Retrieved July 26, 2017, from
Murray, J. (2011). 55 Technology projects for the digital classroom: Everything you need to integrate computers into K-8 classes (3rd ed.). USA: Structured learning.
Mytton, G. (2011). Audience research at the BBC World Service 1932-2010. Participations: Journal of Audience & Reception Studies, 8(1), 75–103.
Naudé, A. M. (2015). Exploring ethical sensitivity in the South African context: developing and implementing a measure in the therapeutic sciences. University of Pretoria.
Naudé, A. M., & Bornman, J. (2014). A systematic review of ethics knowledge in audiology (1980-2010). American Journal of Audiology, 23(2), 151–7.
Ortega, J. L. (2016). Academic Social Networks: Collaborative Environments or Diogenes Clubs? The Scholarly Kitchen. Available on
Pempek, T., Yermoloyeva, Y., & Calvert, S. (2009). College students’ social networking experiences on Facebook. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 30(3), 227–238.
Phillips, M. (2011). Using Social Media in Your Research – Experts Explore the Practicalities of Observing Human Behavior through Facebook and Twitter. Retrieved February 10, 2017, from
Polit, D., & Beck, C. (2012). Nursing research: Principles and method. Philadelphia, Pa: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
Procter, R., Vis, F., & Voss, A. (2013). Reading the riots on Twitter: Methodological innovation for the analysis of big data. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 16(3), 197–214. 10.1080/13645579.2013.
Purdam, K., & Elliot, M. (2015). Exploiting new sources of data. In P. Halfpenny & R. Procter (Eds.), Innovations in digital research methods. London: SAGE Publications, Inc.
Smith, V., Devant, D., Begley, C., & Clarke, M. (2011). Methodology in conducting a systematic review of systematic reviews of healthcare interventions. BioMed Central Medical Research Methodology, 11(15), 1–6.
Snelson, C. (2016). Qualitative and Mixed Methods Social Media Research: A Review of the Literature. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 15(1), 1–15.
Thelwall, M. (2014). Social network sites: Users and uses. Advances in Computers, 76(4), 19–73.
USC Upstate Library. (n.d.). Boolean cats [Digital image]. Retrieved from https://librariandesignshare.files.wordpress.
Veeck, A. (2013, October). Analyzing the content of social media data. Retrieved May 12, 2017, from
Williams, M., Edward, A., Burnap, P., Rana, O., Avis, N., Morgan, J., & Sloan, L. (2013). Policing Cyber-Neighbourhoods: Tension Monitoring and Social Media Networks. Policing and Society, 23(4), 461–481.
Woodfield, K., Morrell, G., Metzler, K., Blank, G., Salmons, J., Finnegan, J. & Lucraft, M. (2013). Blurring the Boundaries? New Social Media, New Social Research. NCRM Networks for Methodological Innovation Report. Retrieved from
Yemm, G. (2013). Essential Guide to Leading Your Team : How to Set Goals, Measure Performance and Reward Talent. London: Financial Times Publishing.

Chapter 5

Bertens, L. C. M., Broekhuizen, B. D. L., Naaktgeboren, C. A., Rutten, F. H., Hoes, A. W., Van Mourik, Y., … Reitsma, J. B. (2013). Use of Expert Panels to Define the Reference Standard in Diagnostic Research: A Systematic Review of Published Methods and Reporting. PLoS Medicine, 10(10), e1001531.
Bornman, J., Sevcik, R., Romski, M. A. & Pae, H. K. (2010). Successfully translating language and culture when adapting assessment measures. Journal of Policy & Practice in Intellectual Disabilities, 7(2), 111-118.
Bruce, J. C., Langley, G. C., & Tjale, A. A. (2008). The use of experts and their judgments in nursing research: an overview. Curationis, 31(4), 57-61.
Chernysheva, T. Y., Korchuganova, M. A., Borisov, V. V. & Min’kov, S. L. (2016). Hierarchical model of assessing and selecting experts. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 127, 012027.
Coulter, I., Elfenbaum, P., Jain, S., & Jonas, W. (2016). SEaRCHTM expert panel process: streamlining the link between evidence and practice. BMC Research Notes, 9, 16.
De Loë, R. C., Melnychuk, N., Murray, D. & Plummer, R. (2015). Advancing the State of Policy Delphi Practice: A Systematic Review Evaluating Methodological Evolution, Innovation, and Opportunities. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 104, 78-88.
Heckathorn, D. D. (2011). Snowball versus Respondent-Driven Sampling. Sociological Methodology, 41(1), 355–366.
Hsu, C. C., & Sandford, B. A. (2007). The Delphi Technique:Making Sense Of Consensus. Practical Asessment, Research & Evaluation, 12(10), 1-8.
Keeney, S. (2015). The Delphi Technique. In K. Gerrish & J. Lathlean (Eds.). The Research Process in Nursing (7th ed.). (pp. 267 – 278). West Sussex, UK: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Langfeldt, L. (2002). Decision-making in expert panels evaluating research: Constraints, processes and bias. Norsk institutt for studier av forskning og utdanning: Oslo, Norway.
Naudé, A. M. (2015). Exploring ethical sensitivity in the South African context: developing and implementing a measure in the therapeutic sciences. University of Pretoria.
Olson, K. (2010). An Examination of Questionnaire Evaluation by Expert Reviewers. Sociology Department, Faculty Publications. 136.
Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2006). The Content Validity Index: Are You Sure You Know What’s Being Reported? Critique and Recommendations. Research in Nursing & Health, 29, 489–497.
Thangaratinam, S., & Redman, C. W. E. (2005). The Delphi technique. The Obstetrician & Gynaecologist, 7, 120–125.
Tuthill1, E. L., Butler, L. M., McGrath, J. M., Cusson, R. M., Makiwane, G. N., Gable1, R. K., & Fisher, J. D. (2014). Cross-cultural adaptation of instruments assessing breastfeeding determinants: a multi-step approach. International Breastfeeding Journal, 9(16), 1-8.
Waltz, T. J., Powell, B. J., Matthieu, M. M., Chinman, M. J., Smith, J. L., Proctor, E. K., Damschroder, L. J., & Kirchner, J. E. (2015). Innovative methods for using expert panels in identifying implementation strategies and obtaining recommendations for their use. Implementation Science, 10(Suppl 1):A44

Chapter 6

Ainsworth, B., Caspersen, C., Matthews, C., Masse, L., Baranowski, T., & Zhu, W. (2012). Recommendations to Improve the Accuracy of Estimates of Physical Activity Derived from Self Report. Journal of Physical Activity and Health, 9(1), S76–S84.
Ary, D., Jacobs, L., & Razavieh, A. (2002). Introduction to research in education. Belmont CA: Wadsworth/Thomson learning.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2013). Successful qualitative research. United Kingdom: SAGE Publications.
Creswell, J. (2005). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research (2nd ed.). New Jersey: Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall.
Crocker, L., & Algina, J. (1986). Introduction to classical and modern test theory. Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Cronback, L., & Meehl, P. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 53(4), 281–302.
Gazette. (2006). Ethical rules of conduct for practioners registered under the Health Professions Act, 1974. Government Gazette, 223(29079), 1–47.
Guba, E. G. (1981). Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries. Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 29, 75–91.
Harty, M. (2009). The validation of a task-specific measure of parenting self-efficacy for use with mothers of young children. University of Pretoria.
Heale, R., & Twycross, A. (2015). Validity and reliability in quantitative research. Validity and reliability in quantitative studies, (January).
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. SAGE Publications. Retrieved from
Marlowe, J. A. (1996). Legal and Risk Management Issues in Newborn Hearing Screening. Seminars in Hearing, 17(2), 153–164.
Naudé, A. M. (2015). Exploring ethical sensitivity in the South African context: developing and implementing a measure in the therapeutic sciences.
Naudé, A. M., & Bornman, J. (2014). A systematic review of ethics knowledge in audiology (1980-2010). American Journal of Audiology, 23(2), 151–7.
Neuman, L. W. (1997). Social research methods: Qualitative and Quantitative approaches. (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Onwuegbuzie, A., & Johnson, R. (2006). The validity issue in mixed research. Research in Schools, 13(1), 48–63.
Onwuegbuzie, A., & Leech, N. (2007). Validity and qualitative research: an oxymoron? International Journal of Methodology, 41, 233–249.
Shenton, A. (2004). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects. Education for Information, 22(63–75).
Silverman, D. (2004). Qualitative research: theory, method and practice. London: Sage.
Trochim, W. (2001). Reliability and Validity. Retrieved June 18, 2017, from
Westen, D., & Rosenthal, R. (2003). Quantifying construct validity: Two simple measures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(3), 608–618.
Wolfaardt, J., & Roodt, G. (2005). Basic concepts. In C. Foxcroft & G. Roodt (Eds.), An introduction to psychological assessment in the South African context (pp. 22–44). Cape Town: Oxford University Press Southern Africa.

Chapter 7

Ary, D., Jacobs, L., & Razavieh, A. (2002). Introduction to research in education. Belmont CA: Wadsworth/Thomson learning.
Bastos, J. L., Duquia, R. P., González-Chica, D. A., Mesa, J. M., & Bonamigo, R. R. (2014). Field work I: Selecting the instrument for data collection. Anais Brasileiros de Dermatologia, 89(6), 918–923.
Borsa, J. C. (2012). Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Validation of Psychological Instruments : Adaptação e Validação de Instrumentos Psicológicos entre Culturas : Algumas Considerações Adaptación y Validación de Instrumentos Psicológicos entre Culturas : Algunas Consideraciones. Paidéia, 22(53), 423–432.
10.1590/1982-43272253201314 Cross-Cultural.
Charman, T., & Gotham, K. (2013). Measurement Issues: Screening and diagnostic instruments for autism spectrum disorders – lessons from research and practice. Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 18(1), 52–63.
Cohen, R., & Swerdlik, M. (2009). Psychological testing and assessment: An introduction to tests and measurement (7th ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
International Test Commission. (2010). International Test Commission guidelines for translating and adapting tests. Retrieved September 2, 2017, from http://www.intestcom.
Johnson, R., & Onwuegbuzie, A. (2004). Mixed methods research: a research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14–26.
Karczeski, B., & Cutting, G. (2010). Molecular testing for cystic fibrosis and CFTR-related conditions. Molecular Diagnostics, 149–165.
Musschenga, A. (2005). Empirical ethics, context-sensitivity, and contextualism. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, 30(5), 467–490.
Sproull, N. (2003). Handbook of research methods: A guide for practitioners and students in the social sciences (2nd ed.). United States: Scarecrow Press

Publish with Nova Science Publishers

We publish over 800 titles annually by leading researchers from around the world. Submit a Book Proposal Now!