Hello Lisa, thank you for sharing your insight on my earlier post, I have read through your sentiments and they are insightful. I agree that the measures used in the study you have mentioned were similar to the ones identified in my discussion and they provide a high level of reliability. Using dispositional optimism identified by Dohmen et al. (2023), validity assessment when measuring this construct relies on how well the construct is measured. Therefore, looking at your argument, it is true that a high level of validity depends on the approach measurements used. The theoretical framework for measuring optimism balances between comprehensive assessment of the construct and the biases involved. Therefore, I strongly believe that an assessment that directly contains items used in the measurement of optimism demonstrates a high level of validity. This is because these items are easier to validate, and also they make it easier for the researcher to conclude. Thus, the items reduce ambiguity and play a vital role in ensuring that the responses are accurate and they are reflections of the intended construct.
Reference
Dohmen, T., Quercia, S., & Willrodt, J. (2023). On the psychology of the relation between optimism and risk taking.
Journal of Risk and Uncertainty,
67(2), 193-214. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11166-023-09409-z