Evaluating the Content Validity: Development of An Instrument for Measuring Functional Building Performance


  • Hasnizan Aksah Faculty of Engineering and Built Environment, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Selangor, Malaysia
  • Adi Irfan Che Ani Faculty of Engineering and Built Environment, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Selangor, Malaysia
  • Suhana Johar Faculty of Engineering and Built Environment, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Selangor, Malaysia
  • Siti Hamidah Husain School of Housing, Building and Planning, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang, Malaysia




content validity, instruments, functional building performance, historic government administrative buildings


Managing the selection of relevant criteria for functional building performance is essential for the building management team because it is strongly related with building occupants’ satisfaction and achievement of organizational objectives. In the current state of functional building performance evaluation, previous studies have shown that the criteria vary that depends on the facility types and purpose of conducting performance evaluation. These selection criteria have a direct impact on functional building performance and need to be done in in a systematic way. The content validity of the functional building performance evaluation instrument is essential step in the instrument development. Therefore, this research aims to evaluate the content validity of Functional Building Performance (FBP) evaluation by using Content Validity Index (CVI) and modified Kappa coefficient. In achieving this research aim, a set of questionnaires was developed based on numerous construct items that obtained from previous studies by various authors and researchers. The selected expert panel in the field of historic building management and building performance evaluation such as local municipality, related government agencies, academician and building management team reviewed and rated the instrument to ensure its relevance and representativeness of each item. The final instrument contained 39 items that is valid and considered to be retained and all items will be further tested in next study. The result also shown the S-CVI/ Ave for all items meet the criterion of 0.90.


Aksah, H., Johar, S., Usman, I. M., & Che Ani, A. I. (2021). Design and Implementation of Content Validity: Instrument Development for Evaluating Functional Building Performance. WSEAS Transactions On Environment and Development, 17, 973–982. https://doi.org/10.37394/232015.2021.17.90

Almanasreh, E., Moles, R., & Chen, T. F. (2019). Evaluation of methods used for estimating content validity. Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy, 15(2), 214–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sapharm.2018.03.066

Bajjou, M. S., Chafi, A., & Ennadi, A. (2019). Development of a Conceptual Framework of Lean Construction Principles: An Input–Output Model. Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Systems, 18(01), 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1142/S021968671950001X

Gopikrishnan, S., & Topkar, V. M. (2017). Attributes and descriptors for building performance evaluation. HBRC Journal, 13(3), 291–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hbrcj.2015.08.004

Gross, D., Fogg, L., Garvey, C., & Julion, W. (2004). Behavior problems in young children: An analysis of cross-informant agreements and disagreements. Research in Nursing & Health, 27(6), 413–425. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.20040

Khalil, N., Kamaruzzaman, S. N., & Baharum, M. R. (2015). A Survey on the Performance-Risk Rating Index for Building Performance Assessment in Higher Education Buildings. Jurnal Teknologi, 75(9), 57–63. https://doi.org/10.11113/jt.v75.5230

Kovacic, D. (2018). Using the Content Validity Index to Determine Content Validity of an Instrument Assessing Health Care Providers’ General Knowledge of Human Trafficking. Journal of Human Trafficking, 4(4), 327–335. https://doi.org/10.1080/23322705.2017.1364905

Lavy, S., Garcia, J. A., & Dixit, M. K. (2010). Establishment of KPIs for facility performance measurement: review of literature. Facilities, 28(9/10), 440–464. https://doi.org/10.1108/02632771011057189

Li, P., Froese, T. M., & Brager, G. (2018). Post-occupancy evaluation: State-of-the-art analysis and state-of-the-practice review. Building and Environment, 133, 187–202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.02.024

Lynn, M. R. (1986). Determination and quantification of content validity. Nursing Research, 35(6), 382–386. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006199-198611000-00017

Masuwai, A. M., & Saad, N. S. (2016). Evaluating the face and content validity of a Teaching and Learning Guiding Principles Instrument (TLGPI): A perspective study of Malaysian teacher educators. Geografia, 12(3), 11–21.

Mat Yasin, M. F., & Egbu, C. O. (2010). Harnessing knowledge management in the process of performance evaluation of facilities in Malaysia: A critical success factor. World Congress 2010.

Mohammad, I. S., Bee Woon, N., Baba, M., Lee Yim Mei, J., Zainol, N. N., & Nazri, A. Q. (2014). Critical Success Factors for Post Occupancy Evaluation of Hospital Building Performance. Jurnal Teknologi, 71(4), 161–166. https://doi.org/10.11113/jt.v71.3837

Mohidin, H. H. B., & Ismail, A. S. (2014a). Historical development of administration architecture in Malaysia (15 th -21st century). IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 18(1), 012089. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/18/1/012089

Mohidin, H. H. B., & Ismail, A. S. (2014b). Responsive Design Approach in Modern Malaysian Administrative Building. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 153, 330–340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.10.066

Pati, D., Park, C.-S., & Augenbroe, G. (2006). Roles of building performance assessment in stakeholder dialogue in AEC. Automation in Construction, 15(4), 415–427. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2005.06.009

Polit, D. F., Beck, C. T., & Owen, S. V. (2007). Is the CVI an acceptable indicator of content validity? Appraisal and recommendations. Research in Nursing & Health, 30(4), 459–467. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.20199

Preiser, W. F. E. (1995). Post‐occupancy evaluation: how to make buildings work better. Facilities, 13(11), 19–28. https://doi.org/10.1108/02632779510097787

Rodrigues, I. B., Adachi, J. D., Beattie, K. A., & MacDermid, J. C. (2017). Development and validation of a new tool to measure the facilitators, barriers and preferences to exercise in people with osteoporosis. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 18(540), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-017-1914-5

Samareh Abolhassani, S., Zandifar, A., Ghourchian, N., Amayri, M., Bouguila, N., & Eicker, U. (2022). Improving residential building energy simulations through occupancy data derived from commercial off-the-shelf Wi-Fi sensing technology. Energy and Buildings, 272, 112354. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2022.112354

Sharpe, T. (2013). Innovations for Sustainable Building Design and Refurbishment in Scotland. In B. Dimitrijević (Ed.), B. Dimitrijević, Ed. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02478-3

Strelets, K., Perlova, E., Platonova, M., Pankova, A., Romero, M., & Al-Shabab, M. S. (2016). Post Occupancy Evaluation (POE) and Energy Conservation Opportunities (ECOs) Study for Three Facilities in SPbPU in Saint Petersburg. Procedia Engineering, 165, 1568–1578. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2016.11.895

Takim, R., Samsuddin, N. M., & Nawawi, A. H. (2016). Assessing the Content Validity of Hospital Disaster Resilience Assessment Instrument. Jurnal Teknologi, 78(5–2), 35–42. https://doi.org/10.11113/jt.v78.8485

Zamanzadeh, V., Ghahramanian, A., Rassouli, M., Abbaszadeh, A., Alavi-Majd, H., & Nikanfar, A. (2015). Design and Implementation Content Validity Study: Development of an instrument for measuring Patient-Centered Communication. Journal of Caring Sciences, 4(2), 165–178. https://doi.org/10.15171/jcs.2015.017




How to Cite

Aksah, H., Che Ani, A. I., Johar, S., & Husain, S. H. (2023). Evaluating the Content Validity: Development of An Instrument for Measuring Functional Building Performance. International Journal of Global Optimization and Its Application, 2(1), 12–19. https://doi.org/10.56225/ijgoia.v2i1.161



Abstract viewed = 171 times