Courage can be interpreted in many ways. The main reason behind this is because of different
view point of each people. This logic is the reason why validity and reliability is important. For
example, a related definition to courage can be aggressive. This is usually the case related to
actual behaviours in people’s real lives because being courageous means inputting an action
that not many people will do such as helping a stranger carry a heavy bag.
In order to test for the validity of the measurement I am currently trying to find, first and
foremost, it must measure the measurement it was designed to measure. This means that the
courage measurement should measure courage. However, reliable measures are not
automatically valid. The measurement may give a reliable score but the score may be
underestimated due to different interpretation of items. This is exactly the reason why the first
question is set as a control question where it will ask for a solid yes or no answer.
On the other hand, Using either internal consistency or test-retest -reliability, reliability becomes
relatively easy to examine. Internal consistency which is using multiple questions called items
with similar basis can help eliminate random measurement error. Test-retest-reliability is similar
to internal consistency but the question remains the same and requires a delay in-between the
test in order for the subject to not be influenced by the previous question.
Do you see yourself as being courageous?
If a fight occurs right in front of you and no one is there to stop it, would you step in the fight and
be the one t