Comparar métodos
Revisa los métodos seleccionados uno junto a otro; las filas que difieren aparecen resaltadas.
| Validez nomológica ordinal× | Análisis Factorial Confirmatorio (AFC)× | |
|---|---|---|
| Campo | Psicometría | Psicometría |
| Familia | Latent structure | Latent structure |
| Año de origen≠ | 1955 (concept); ordinal application 1990s–present | 1969 |
| Autor original≠ | Cronbach & Meehl (nomological network concept); ordinal extension in modern psychometrics | Karl Gustav Jöreskog |
| Tipo≠ | Validity assessment | Hypothesis-testing latent variable model |
| Fuente seminal≠ | Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52(4), 281–302. DOI ↗ | Jöreskog, K. G. (1969). A general approach to confirmatory maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 34(2), 183–202. DOI ↗ |
| Alias | nomological validity for ordinal data, ordinal nomological network, construct network validity (ordinal), ordinal criterion-related validity | CFA, confirmatory FA, measurement model, restricted factor analysis |
| Relacionados≠ | 5 | 4 |
| Resumen≠ | Ordinal nomological validity examines whether a construct measured with ordinal items (e.g., Likert-type scales) behaves in theoretically predicted ways within a nomological network — a web of expected relationships with other constructs and criteria — using methods suited to ordinal data rather than assuming continuous measurement. | Confirmatory factor analysis tests a researcher-specified factor structure against observed data. Unlike exploratory approaches, the researcher decides in advance which indicators load on which latent factor, and the model is evaluated by how closely the implied covariance matrix reproduces the sample covariance matrix. CFA is central to scale validation, construct validity assessment, and measurement invariance testing. |
| ScholarGateConjunto de datos ↗ |
|
|