ScholarGate
Assistent

Compara mètodes

Revisa els mètodes seleccionats l'un al costat de l'altre; les files que difereixen es ressalten.

Validesa de contingut×Validesa de constructe×
CampPsicometriaPsicometria
FamíliaLatent structureLatent structure
Any d'origen19751955
Autor originalC. H. Lawshe (quantitative framework); earlier qualitative traditions in educational measurementLee J. Cronbach & Paul E. Meehl
TipusValidity evidence / expert judgement procedureValidity evaluation framework
Font seminalLawshe, 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 ↗
Àliescontent-related validity, logical validity, face validity, content validationconstruct validation, factorial validity, nomological validity evidence, validity of interpretation
Relacionats66
ResumContent 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.
ScholarGateConjunt de dades
  1. v1
  2. 2 Fonts
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 2 Fonts
  3. PUBLISHED

Ves a la cerca Download slides

ScholarGateCompara mètodes: Content Validity · Construct Validity. Recuperat el 2026-06-15 de https://scholargate.app/ca/compare