Farah Zidan Nourhan Walid Randa Sorour Hesham Hamouda Karim Ramdan

Many critics attribute the poor quality of Marketing literature and body of knowledge to the measures marketers use to assess their variables of interest. These measures are considered poor and uncritical because someone says they are, not because they satisfy standard measurement criteria such as validity, reliability and sensitivity.
This article provides a framework or a procedure for marketers to follow in order to develop measures which have desirable reliability and validity properties which will improve the quality of literature as well as marketing practices.

The main problem is that there is a gap between the need for better measures and the lack of such measures in other words there is a lack of the know-how.
The article is trying to solve this problem by constructing a paradigm or a framework to how to develop sophisticated measures. First, the article defined the process of measurement itself as the process of assigning numbers to objects to represent quantities of attributes, which means that when were measuring an object or a certain variable, we measure its attributes by assigning number to each and every one of them which follows no rules . ( XO= XT + X + XR)

A measure is valid when the scores obtained reflect true differences on the attributes, one is measuring. As for reliability, a measure is considered reliable based on the extent to which measures of the same object or trait agree as well as on how much the scores vary due to random or chance errors.
If a measure is valid it is reliable but the converse is not true in other words reliability is a necessary but not a sufficient condition for validity. Measures are not accurate; they are always inferences which quality depends on the procedures used to develop the measures and the evidence supporting their goodness.

Problem and Approach CONTD

Therefore, the article proposes/suggests the following procedure:

Step1: Specify domain of construct Step2: Generate sample of items Step3: Collect data Step4: Purify the measure Step5: Collect data Step6: Assess reliability Step7: Assess validity Step8: Develop norms This process is only applicable to multi-item measures which are much better than individual measures since reliability tends to increase and measurement error decreases as the number of items increases.

The first step in the suggested procedure for developing better measures. Researcher must be exact in specifying the construct and what is and what is not included in the definition. For instance, the Customer Satisfaction construct.

The buyers cognitive state of being adequately or inadequately rewarded in a buying situation for the sacrifice he has undergone. The adequacy is a consequence of matching the actual past purchase with the reward that was expected from the brand on terms of its anticipated potential to satisfy the motives served by the particular product. -Howard and Sheth (1969)-

Specify Domain of the Construct CONTD

By this definition, satisfaction seems to be an attitude. In order to measure Satisfaction, it is necessary to measure both:
Expectations at the time of purchase
Cost Durability Quality Operating Performance

Reactions at some time after purchase

As researchers consult the literature when conceptualizing constructs and specifying domains, one of the main problems cited is the use of widely varying definitions.

The use of different definitions makes it difficult to compare and accumulate findings and thereby develop syntheses of what is known.
Therefore, researchers should have good reasons for proposing additional new measures. Moreover, they should present a detailed statement of the reasons and evidence as to why the new measure is better.

The second step in the procedure for developing better measures. Techniques that are productive in exploratory research:
Literature Searches Experience Surveys

Insight Stimulating Examples

Critical incidents and focus groups also can be used to advantage at the item-generation stage with different scenarios. The scenarios can be presented to the respondents individually or 8 to 10 of them might be brought together in focus group.

Coefficient Alpha

Factor Analysis
Iteration

The major source of error within a test is the sampling items.

If the sample is appropriate and the items look right then it is said to be reliable.

But this is not the main issue, however, there are ambiguous questions that produce guessing which tend to produce error in the measurements.
Those errors can be encompassed by the domain sampling model. All the sources of error happening within a Measurement will lower the average correlation among the items within the test, which is needed to estimate the reliability.

Coefficient alpha is the basic statistic for determining the reliability of a measure based on internal consistency.

Furthermore, it was suggested in this article not use test-retest reliability which goes by respondents memory.

Specifying the domain of the construct, generating items that exhaust the domain, and subsequently purifying the resulting scale should produce a measure, which is valid. Yet, It may or may not produce a measure that has construct Validity, which lies at the center of scientific process that is directly related to the question of what the instrument is measuring-what construct, trait or concept. However, to establish the construct validity of a measure, the analyst also must determine (1) the extent to which the measure correlates with other measures designed to measure the same thing and (2) whether the measure behaves as expected. Moreover, Discriminate validity is the extent to which the measure is new and not simply a reflection of some other variable. However, Discriminate validity suggests three comparisons.

A better way of assessing the position of the individual on the characteristic is to compare the persons score with the score achieved by other people.. This process is Developing Norms. Norm Quality is a function of both the number of cases on which the average is based and their representatives.
Norms need not be developed, all one needs to do is compare the raw scores.

The purpose of this article is to outline a procedure which can be followed to develop better measures of marketing variables.

Marketers need to pay more attention to measure development.

Persons doing research of a fundamental nature are well advised to execute the whole process suggested in this article.