Psychometric properties of the instrument
Validity of the instrument
Validity is described as the extent to which the instrument can be relied upon to do what it purports to do accurately (Olasehinde, 1995). Validity assess the relevance of the instrument to it purpose. Hassan (1995) defined validity as an indication of the extent to which a measuring instrument measure what it is supposed to measure. In the light of this, content validity of the instrument was thus ascertained by the researcher; the supervisor and three other lecturers in the department of counsellor education were implored to vet the questionnaire and useful suggestions made by then were strictly adhered to.
Reliability of the instrument
Oladele (1987) stated that reliability is the consistency stability and trustworthiness of a measuring instrument or scores obtained. That is, how far the same test would give the same result if it would be done again by the same pupils on different occasions or with different sets of equivalent items under the simple conditions.
To establish the reliability of the instrument, the test-retest method was adopted. The researcher administered the same instrument on the same group of twenty adult persons at an interval of four weeks. The two sets of score were computed using Pearson Product Moment Correlation Co-efficient formula. The reliability co-efficient was 0.73 which indicates a positive correlation of the scores obtained during the two period of administration. In a nutshell, the reliability co-efficient showed that the instrument is reliable. However, those that participated in determine the reliability did not form part of main sample of study.
Procedure for Data Administration and Collection
The randomly selected adult persons in local government areas in Ilorin metropolis were personally administered the instrument to. The researcher administered the questionnaire directly on the respondents. Respondents were made to understand that the questionnaire is strictly confidential and are to be used purely for educational purpose only. The researcher collected the completed questionnaires personally from the respondents.
Procedure for scoring the instrument
The response to each item was scored as follows: -
Strongly Agree (SA) 4 points
Agree (A) 3 points
Disagree (D) 2 points
Strongly Disagreed (SD) 1 point
The likert type of scale score on a four (4) points (1 – 4) is considered appropriate for this instrument because, it gives respondents the opportunity to respond more freely to each of the items in the instrument.
The demographic section “A†of the instrument was scored using frequency counts and percentages. The responses were scored item by items. In section “Bâ€, there are 19 items to determine the causes of child trafficking. Item 1 to 19 were scored using 4 for strongly agree, 3 for agree, 2 for disagree and 1 for strongly disagree.
In section C, there are 10 items to determine the consequences of child trafficking, items 1 – 10 were scored using 4 points also for strongly agree, 3 for agree, 2 for disagree and 1 for strongly disagree.
Method of Data Analysis
Section A of the instrument was analysed using frequency counts and percentages.
The hypotheses were tested using t-test statistical method to compare the mean scores of two groups.