Second, the research analyzes if it is logical to consider the relationship as casual and it is through assessment of internal validity that this specific issue is determined. Third, a research analyzes if it is reasonable to consider that the scores on measures represent their respective constructs and construct validation procedures seem to be most effective method to address this question. In social research, there are four main concerns that correspond to four types of validity. “In essence these four types of validity concern different sorts of relationships in the research enterprise. Construct validity refers to the relationships between theoretical constructs and their operations. Both conclusion and internal validity refer to the relationship between the operationalized treatment and operationalized outcome… External validity concerns the relationship between the hypothesized constructs that were operationalized and other constructs of interest that were not.” (Judd and Kenny, 1981, p 20). It is most essential to compare and contrast the characteristics of external, internal, and construct validity in order to identify the threats to external and construct validity and to comprehend how validity issues could impact a research.
In a profound analysis of validity in relation to social research, it becomes palpable that external, internal, and construct validity are very essential in order to assess the true validity of every study and it is necessary to define them separately. Thus, construct validity may be defined as “the extent to which the theoretical constructs of treatment, outcome, population, and setting have been successfully opearionalized,” and external validity as “the extent to which the effects we observe among operationalized constructs can be generalized to theoretical constructs other than those specified in the original research hypothesis,” whereas internal validity is “the extent to which the detected effects