Sammenlign metoder
Gennemgå dine valgte metoder side om side; rækker, der afviger, er fremhævet.
| Kortform-indholdsgyldighed× | Indholdsvaliditet× | |
|---|---|---|
| Fagområde | Psykometri | Psykometri |
| Familie | Latent structure | Latent structure |
| Oprindelsesår≠ | 1995–2000 | 1975 |
| Ophavsperson≠ | Messick (validity framework); Smith et al. (short-form standards) | C. H. Lawshe (quantitative framework); earlier qualitative traditions in educational measurement |
| Type≠ | Validity evaluation | Validity evidence / expert judgement procedure |
| Oprindelig kilde≠ | Smith, G. T., McCarthy, D. M., & Anderson, K. G. (2000). On the sins of short-form development. Psychological Assessment, 12(1), 102–111. DOI ↗ | Lawshe, C. H. (1975). A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel Psychology, 28(4), 563–575. link ↗ |
| Aliasser | abbreviated scale content validity, short-scale content coverage, brief form content validity, content validity for short forms | content-related validity, logical validity, face validity, content validation |
| Relaterede | 6 | 6 |
| Resumé≠ | Short-form content validity evaluates whether items retained in an abbreviated scale still adequately represent every substantive facet of the construct measured by the original full-length instrument. It ensures that shortening a scale does not hollow out the conceptual domain it was designed to cover. | 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. |
| ScholarGateDatasæt ↗ |
|
|