Penilaian Instrumen Kualiti Hidup Perumahan Awam Bagi Miskin Bandar Menggunakan Kaedah Kesahan Kandungan

Zulasri Pitting; Marsitah Mohd Radzi

doi:10.47405/mjssh.v7i4.1467

Zulasri Pitting Fakulti Sains Sosial dan Kemanusiaan, Universiti Malaysia Sabah (UMS), 88400 Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, Malaysia.
Marsitah Mohd Radzi Fakulti Sains Sosial dan Kemanusiaan, Universiti Malaysia Sabah (UMS), 88400 Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, Malaysia.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.47405/mjssh.v7i4.1467

Keywords: Kesahan Kandungan, Kualiti Hidup, Instrumen

Abstract

Kesahan kandungan sesuatu instrumen kajian itu adalah penting bagi memastikan kesesuaian dan kejelasan item dalam instrumen tersebut. Kesahan kandungan kajian ini dibuat menggunakan kaedah penilaian panel pakar menggunakan borang penilaian yang telah disediakan oleh pengkaji. Sebanyak enam orang panel pakar telah dipilih daripada tiga kategori latar belakang berbeza iaitu akademik, jawatan dan pengalaman. Pengukuran kesahan kandungan dibuat menggunakan dua pengukuran iaitu kesahan kandungan bagi setiap item (I-CVI) dan Kesahan kandungan bagi skala keseluruhan (S-CVI/Ave). Hasil kajian menunjukkan bahawa instrumen kajian mempunyai skor kesahan kandungan yang tinggi dengan mencapai skor I-CVI di antara 0.833-1.00 dan juga skor S-CVI/Ave di antara 0.96-1.00. Oleh yang tersebut, dapat disimpulkan bahawa instrumen kajian yang dibentuk mempunyai kesahan kandungan yang baik. Hasil kajian ini dapat digunakan sebagai rujukan awalan dalam perbincangan khususnya yang melibatkan perumahan awam bagi miskin bandar agar perumahan awam yang lebih kondusif dan baik dapat disediakan kepada golongan sasar.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Alderfer, C. P. (1969). An empirical test of a new theory of human needs. Organ Behav Hum Perform 4(2):142–175. Dalam Avradinis, N., Panayiotopoulos, T., & Anastassakis, G. 2013. Behavior believability in virtual worlds: agents acting when they need to. SpringerPlus, 2(1), 1-11.

Babonea, A. M., & Voicu, M. C. (2011). Questionnaires pretesting in marketing research. Challenges of the Knowledge Society, 1, 1323-1330.

Greyling, T., & Tregenna, F. (2020). Quality of life: Validation of an instrument and analysis of relationships between domains. Development Southern Africa, 37(1), 19-39.

Ikart, E. M. (2019). Survey questionnaire survey pretesting method: An evaluation of survey questionnaire via expert reviews technique. Asian Journal of Social Science Studies, 4(2), 1.

Leslie, R. O. & James R.M.J. (2006) What's this r? A Correlational Approach to Explaining Validity, Reliability and Objectivity Coefficients, Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science, 10(2), 137-145.

Maslow, A. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50, 370-396.

Mohit, M. A. (2014). Present trends and future directions of quality-of-life. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 153, 655-665.

Polit, D. F., Beck, C. T., & Owen, S. V. (2007). Is the CVI an acceptable indicator of content validity? Appraisal and recommendations. Research in nursing & health, 30(4), 459-467.

Robson, C. (2011). Real World Research: A Resource for Users of Social Research Methods in Applied Settings, (2nd Ed.). Sussex, A. John Wiley and Sons Ltd. Dalam Mohajan, H. K. (2017). Two criteria for good measurements in research: Validity and reliability. Annals of Spiru Haret University. Economic Series, 17(4), 59-82.

Rodrigues, I. B., Adachi, J. D., Beattie, K. A., & MacDermid, J. C. (2017). Development and validation of a new tool to measure the facilitators, barriers and preferences to exercise in people with osteoporosis. BMC Musculoskeletal disorders, 18(1), 1-9.

Rubio, D. M., Berg-Weger, M., Tebb, S. S., Lee, E. S., & Rauch, S. (2003). Objectifying content validity: Conducting a content validity study in social work research. Social work research, 27(2), 94-104.

Shi, J., Mo, X., & Sun, Z. (2012). Content validity index in scale development. Journal of Central South University. Medical sciences, 37(2), 152-155.

Tull, D. & Hawkins D. (1976). Marketing Research Meaninq, Measurement and Methods. New York: McMillan Publishing Co. Inc

Van Hecke, N., Claes, C., Vanderplasschen, W., De Maeyer, J., De Witte, N., & Vandevelde, S. 2018. Conceptualisation and measurement of quality of life based on Schalock and Verdugo’s model: A cross-disciplinary review of the literature. Social Indicators Research, 137(1), 335-351.

Yusoff, M. S. B. (2019). ABC of content validation and content validity index calculation. Education in Medicine Journal, 11(2), 49-54.