 |
||||||||||||||||
 |
 |
 |
||||||||||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
|||
 |
 |
|||||||||||||||
 |
||||||||||||||||
 |
||||||||||||||||
 |
||||||||||||||||
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Radar validity
There are 4 ways to assess the validity of tests:
- Face validity: provides information on the suitability of the tool itself for a given measurement task.
From a sample of 617 participants, 89.34% agreed with the findings of the test carried out on them. Where there was disagreement with the findings, this was related to an average of 1 or 2 of the 48 cognitive patterns. This is one of the highest scores obtained by psychometric tests available today.
- Content validity: determines whether the questions accurately measure the content. Most tests meet requirements here because the questions are derived from the theory.
The questionnaire is indeed based on the LAB Profile theory and is verified by various experts in LAB profiling. In 2003, a study was carried out by 30 LAB profiling experts to assess whether they could identify the patterns when analyzing the questionnaire (Reverse Engineering). This study showed that all the patterns were detected.
- Criterion of predictive validity: Criterion or predictive validity: Does the test have a predictive value? An IQ test shows that some people have a higher IQ than others. This validity measures whether a higher IQ actually predicts that these people will achieve better results at school.
Candidates who are compared to a model of excellence and score high in the ranking, do appear to perform much better than those who score low in the ranking, and this based on actual measurable results. Every model of excellence is set up in such a way that correlations of 0.6 to 0.85 are achieved. A good model of excellence will therefore predict up to 80% whether a person will perform well in their job when they possess the necessary competences for the job in question.
- Construct validity: is there independence between the individual elements of the test, or is one element subject to another?
LAB profiling experts have divided the questionnaire into separate sentences and have identified the metaprograms that determine the results. This is also possible by way of correlation analysis of the various categories. The correlation between the categories is up to 0.3, and within the categories up to 0.5. This also meets construct validity requirements.
The radar tools are hereby among the very few tools available today that satisfy all 4 validity requirements. Most tools only meet the first 2 standards as no clear cause-effect relationship can be identified. The cause-effect relationship can be demonstrated extremely well in a radar model of excellence.
Have we caught your attention, and you'd like to know more?
- Download the pdf brochure of radar here
- Watch our online radar presentation
- Register for our next radar workshop! on Monday 16 of June 2008 at IKEA in Zaventem! Download the invitation (in pdf) here!
- Fill out the radar-iWAM questionnaire yourself! Go to the following website and click on the "Register Now" button. Once you've filled out your contact details you can fill out the radar-iWAM questionnaire. Fill out the radar-iWAM questionnaire now!
- Follow Dynamo's 2-day radar interview training! The next interview training will take place on 9 and 16 October 2008 in Leuven. Register now for the radar interview training!