Validity of the Style Analysis Instrument
Validity
of the Style Analysis, TTI's DISC Instrument
A
large body of research has supported the reliability and validity
of the Style Analysis and the
DISC dimensions. This research has provided evidence of:
-
High
test-retest
reliability
(the stability of test scores over time)
-
Strong
Construct
Validity
(the relationship of the Style Analysis to other tests measuring
similar constructs)
-
Robust
Content
Validity
(how well the DISC dimensions measure what they are supposed
to measure)
-
Significant
Criterion
or Predictive Validity
(the ability of the DISC dimensions to predict performance on
another activity)
-
Powerful
Construct
Validity
(the
extent to which the DISC dimensions measure a specific trait).
A
full
Style Analysis Validity
Study is available for
download (850 Kb) by clicking here
Validity Study.
A
Note on Validity
The
Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) has never been internationally
recognised as being particularly accurate. It is based on Carl Jung's
desired work to measure "deviant behaviour", and places
responses into 16 categories that are valid for only 54% of the
population - the other 46% of all responses are assigned to the
"nearest category". TTI's Managing for Success™
Software, by comparison, is based on a Style Analysis instrument
developed in the late 1960's that has never been challenged in court.
It has a validity rate of between 88% and 91% based on a study conducted
by Dr. Russell J. Watson of Wheaton College in March of 1989, and
an earlier study of the Personal Profile System conducted in 1983
by Dr. Sylvan J. Kaplan.
The
Style Analysis instrument is deceptively simple, asking respondents
to choose what they are "most" and "least" like
from 24 different boxes. Yet some 19,630 different graphs can be
plotted from the 24 "most" words; and 19,680 different
graphs from the "least" responses. For practical evaluation
purposes, these are condensed into one of 384 different graphs,
hence the very high validity rate.
^ Top
|
