Psychometric Properties of Data Gathering Tools Used in Thesis
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, ISSN: 1877-0428, Vol: 174, Page: 2849-2855
2015
- 14Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Captures14
- Readers14
- 14
Article Description
Reliability and validity of data gathering tools used in postgraduate theses are crucial to obtain error-free evaluation results and to ensure that the data gathered through these means serve their purpose. This study investigated the presented evidence regarding the reliability and validity of data gathering tools (measurement tools) used in master's and PhD theses. The population of the study undertaken via document review method was composed of a total of 111 theses obtained between the years of 2011-2014 from the Institute of Educational Sciences of a university situated in the Western Black Sea region of Turkey. 93 of these theses were master's theses whereas 18 were PhD theses. Sample of the study was composed of a total of 46 theses open to publication (39 master's theses, 7 PhD theses). Data were analyzed descriptively (%, f). Findings point to the important problems faced during proving process of reliability and validity of data gathering tools used in theses. Suggestions were provided in the light of the findings.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S187704281501037X; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.978; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S187704281501037X; https://api.elsevier.com/content/article/PII:S187704281501037X?httpAccept=text/xml; https://api.elsevier.com/content/article/PII:S187704281501037X?httpAccept=text/plain; https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.978
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know