arbiter
JournalsPricingAccount

Discovering the critical number of respondents to validate an item in a questionnaire: the binomial cut-level content validity proposal

Hélder Gomes Costa et al.

Quality & Quantity2026https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-026-02665-6preprint
ABDC B
Weight
0.50

What the paper says

The question that drives this research is: “How to discover the number of respondents that are necessary to validate items of a questionnaire as actually essential to reach the questionnaire’s proposal?” Among the efforts in this subject, Lawshe (Pers. Psychol 28:563–575, 1975), Wilson et al. (Meas. Eval. Couns. Dev. 45:197–210, 2012), Ayre and Scally (Meas. Eval. Couns. Dev. 47:79–86, 2014), Lynn (Nurs. Res. 35:382–386, 1986); Polit et al. (Res. Nurs. Health 30:459–467, 2007) approached this issue by proposing the Content Validation Ratio (CVR) and Content Validations index (CVI) proportion that look to identify items that must be relevant or even essential in a questionnaire. Despite their contribution, these studies do not check if an item validated as “essential” should be also validated as “not essential” by the same sample, which should be a paradox. Another issue is the the loss of nuance caused by assigning a probability equal to 50% to a item be randomly checked by a respondent as essential, despite the rater has three or more options to choose. Our proposal faces these issues, making it possible to verify if a paradoxical situation occurs, and being more precise in recommending whether an item should either be retained or discarded from a questionnaire.

Open paper page →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-026-02665-6

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{hélder2026,
  title        = {{Discovering the critical number of respondents to validate an item in a questionnaire: the binomial cut-level content validity proposal}},
  author       = {Hélder Gomes Costa et al.},
  journal      = {Quality & Quantity},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-026-02665-6},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Discovering the critical number of respondents to validate an item in a questionnaire: the binomial cut-level content validity proposal

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.