পদ্ধতির তুলনা করুন
নির্বাচিত পদ্ধতিগুলো পাশাপাশি পর্যালোচনা করুন; যে সারিগুলোয় পার্থক্য আছে সেগুলো চিহ্নিত করা হয়।
| বিষয়বস্তু বৈধতা× | গঠনগত বৈধতা× | |
|---|---|---|
| ক্ষেত্র | মনোমিতি | মনোমিতি |
| পরিবার | Latent structure | Latent structure |
| উদ্ভবের বছর≠ | 1975 | 1955 |
| প্রবর্তক≠ | C. H. Lawshe (quantitative framework); earlier qualitative traditions in educational measurement | Lee J. Cronbach & Paul E. Meehl |
| ধরন≠ | Validity evidence / expert judgement procedure | Validity evaluation framework |
| মৌলিক উৎস≠ | Lawshe, C. H. (1975). A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel Psychology, 28(4), 563–575. link ↗ | Cronbach, L. J. & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52(4), 281–302. DOI ↗ |
| অপর নাম | content-related validity, logical validity, face validity, content validation | construct validation, factorial validity, nomological validity evidence, validity of interpretation |
| সম্পর্কিত | 6 | 6 |
| সারসংক্ষেপ≠ | Content validity is evidence that a measurement instrument adequately samples the full domain of the construct it is intended to measure. It is established through systematic expert review and quantified with indices such as Lawshe's Content Validity Ratio (CVR) and Lynn's Content Validity Index (CVI), making it the foundational validity step in scale development. | Construct validity is the degree to which a test or scale actually measures the theoretical construct it is intended to measure. Introduced by Cronbach and Meehl in 1955, it is the central validity concern in psychological and educational measurement, evaluated by accumulating multiple lines of empirical and logical evidence rather than by any single statistical test. |
| ScholarGateডেটাসেট ↗ |
|
|