Validar un cuestionario no es opinar
Loading...
Files
Date
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú. Departamento Académico de Ciencias de la Gestión
DOI
Acceso al texto completo solo para la Comunidad PUCP
Abstract
La validación de instrumentos cuantitativos, como cuestionarios, exige un proceso sistemático y empírico que trasciende la mera opinión de expertos. Esta nota académica enfatiza que validar no es opinar: es demostrar, mediante evidencia estadística, que un instrumento mide de forma precisa y consistente el constructo teórico que pretende evaluar. Se distingue entre validez (precisión) y fiabilidad (consistencia), y se explican los principales tipos de validez: de contenido, de constructo y de criterio. Además, se advierte sobre el uso inadecuado de métodos exclusivamente cualitativos en validaciones cuantitativas. La nota ofrece un procedimiento riguroso para la validación psicométrica, subraya consideraciones éticas vinculadas al uso de instrumentos no validados, y formula recomendaciones prácticas para estudiantes y asesores. Finalmente, aboga por una cultura académica más alineada con los estándares internacionales en investigación cuantitativa, en beneficio de la calidad científica y la responsabilidad social.
The validation of quantitative instruments, such as questionnaires, requires a systematic and empirical process that goes beyond the mere opinion of experts. This Academic Note emphasizes that validation is not about expressing opinions; it is about demonstrating, through statistical evidence, that an instrument accurately and consistently measures the theoretical construct it is intended to assess. It distinguishes between validity (accuracy) and reliability (consistency), and explains the main types of validity: content, construct, and criterion validity. In addition, it warns against the inappropriate use of purely qualitative methods in the validation of quantitative instruments. The note presents a rigorous procedure for psychometric validation, highlights ethical considerations related to the use of nonvalidated instruments, and offers practical recommendations for students and advisors. Finally, it advocates for an academic culture more aligned with international standards in quantitative research, for the benefit of scientific quality and social responsibility.
The validation of quantitative instruments, such as questionnaires, requires a systematic and empirical process that goes beyond the mere opinion of experts. This Academic Note emphasizes that validation is not about expressing opinions; it is about demonstrating, through statistical evidence, that an instrument accurately and consistently measures the theoretical construct it is intended to assess. It distinguishes between validity (accuracy) and reliability (consistency), and explains the main types of validity: content, construct, and criterion validity. In addition, it warns against the inappropriate use of purely qualitative methods in the validation of quantitative instruments. The note presents a rigorous procedure for psychometric validation, highlights ethical considerations related to the use of nonvalidated instruments, and offers practical recommendations for students and advisors. Finally, it advocates for an academic culture more aligned with international standards in quantitative research, for the benefit of scientific quality and social responsibility.
Description
Keywords
Validación psicométrica, Cuestionarios, Validez, Fiabilidad, Ética en la investigación
Citation
Collections
Endorsement
Review
Supplemented By
Referenced By
Creative Commons license
Except where otherwised noted, this item's license is described as info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess

