Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Related Concept Videos

Reliability and Validity

Reliability and Validity

Reliability and validity are two important considerations that must be made with any type of data collection. Reliability refers to the ability to consistently produce a given result. In the context of psychological research, this would mean that any instruments or tools used to collect data do so in consistent, reproducible ways.

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by

Same author

Inside Semantic Feature Analysis: A Within-Trial Analysis of Feature Quantity and Quality.

American journal of speech-language pathology·2026

Same author

A preliminary study investigating a language intervention for people with aphasia comparing human <i>versus</i> AAC-generated speech feedback.

Disability and rehabilitation. Assistive technology·2026

Same author

Degraded neural coding of temporal fine structure with age predicts effortful listening in multi-talker environments.

bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology·2025

Same author

Cognitive Functions Supporting Learning Over Time in Naming Treatment for Aphasia.

Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR·2025

Same author

Augmenting Verb-Naming Therapy With Neuromodulation Decelerates Language Loss in Primary Progressive Aphasia.

American journal of speech-language pathology·2024

Same author

Threshold Estimation and Speech Perception Under Hearing Loss Simulation: Examination of the Immersive Hearing Loss and Prosthesis Simulator.

American journal of audiology·2023

Same journal

Age-Related Maturation of Antiphasic Arabic Digits-in-Noise Thresholds in Children.

Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR·2026

Same journal

Case Studies of Auditory Processing Assessment and Management for Veterans.

Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR·2026

Same journal

Effect of Acupuncture Combined With Computer-Assisted Cognitive Training on Language and Cognitive Functions in Poststroke Aphasia: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR·2026

Same journal

Understanding How Older Adults Comprehend Simple Comparative Sentences in a Predicate-Final Language.

Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR·2026

Same journal

Perception of Synthesized Mandarin Speech Based on a Large-Scale Language Model Among Deaf Adults With Cochlear Implants.

Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR·2026

Same journal

Measurement Variability of Peak Flow: A Laboratory Experiment Comparing Cough Testing Equipment.

Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR·2026

See all related articles

Search research articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: May 31, 2025

Use of a Video Scoring Anchor for Rapid Serial Assessment of Social Communication in Toddlers

Use of a Video Scoring Anchor for Rapid Serial Assessment of Social Communication in Toddlers

Published on: March 14, 2018

Development, Reliability, and Concurrent Validity of the American Sign Language Version of the Computerized Revised

Emily B Goldberg¹, Sheila R Pratt^1,2, Malcolm R McNeil^1,2

¹Department of Communication Science and Disorders, University of Pittsburgh, PA.

Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research : JSLHR

|January 24, 2025

Summary

This summary is machine-generated.

The American Sign Language version of the Computerized Revised Token Test (CRTT-ASL) shows good reliability for Deaf ASL users. This tool may help assess language processing and lexical inefficiencies in the Deaf signing population.

More Related Videos

Computerized Adaptive Testing System of Functional Assessment of Stroke

Computerized Adaptive Testing System of Functional Assessment of Stroke

Published on: January 7, 2019

Development of a Virtual Reality Assessment of Everyday Living Skills

Development of a Virtual Reality Assessment of Everyday Living Skills

Published on: April 23, 2014

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: May 31, 2025

Use of a Video Scoring Anchor for Rapid Serial Assessment of Social Communication in Toddlers

Use of a Video Scoring Anchor for Rapid Serial Assessment of Social Communication in Toddlers

Published on: March 14, 2018

Computerized Adaptive Testing System of Functional Assessment of Stroke

Computerized Adaptive Testing System of Functional Assessment of Stroke

Published on: January 7, 2019

Development of a Virtual Reality Assessment of Everyday Living Skills

Development of a Virtual Reality Assessment of Everyday Living Skills

Published on: April 23, 2014

Area of Science:

Linguistics
Audiology
Neuroscience

Background:

Assessing language processing in Deaf individuals using American Sign Language (ASL) presents unique challenges.
The development of culturally and linguistically appropriate assessment tools is crucial for accurate evaluation.

Purpose of the Study:

To evaluate the test-retest reliability of the American Sign Language version of the Computerized Revised Token Test (CRTT-ASL).
To compare language processing abilities between Deaf users of ASL and hearing users of ASL through both ASL and English modalities.

Main Methods:

The CRTT-ASL was developed and validated. Proficient Deaf (DP) and hearing (proficient and nonproficient) ASL users completed the CRTT-ASL and an English reading version (CRTT-R-wf).
Both tests were administered twice, with a 7-14 day interval, to determine test-retest reliability.

Main Results:

The CRTT-ASL demonstrated acceptable test-retest reliability for the Deaf ASL user group.
All groups exhibited adequate test-retest reliability for the CRTT-R-wf.
Deaf ASL users performed comparably on both CRTT-ASL and CRTT-R-wf, but scored lower on the English reading test compared to hearing groups.

Conclusions:

The CRTT-ASL appears to be a reliable tool for assessing language processing in Deaf individuals who use ASL.
Preliminary findings support the use of CRTT-ASL in clinical and research settings for the Deaf signing population.
The CRTT-ASL may be sensitive to specific lexical processing differences within this population.