Vertaile menetelmiä
Tarkastele valitsemiasi menetelmiä rinnakkain; eroavat rivit korostetaan.
| Multilevel nomological validity× | Vahvistava faktorianalyysi (CFA)× | |
|---|---|---|
| Tieteenala | Psykometriikka | Psykometriikka |
| Menetelmäperhe | Latent structure | Latent structure |
| Syntyvuosi≠ | 2005 | 1969 |
| Kehittäjä≠ | Chen, Bliese & Mathieu (building on Cronbach & Meehl) | Karl Gustav Jöreskog |
| Tyyppi≠ | Validity assessment / construct validation | Hypothesis-testing latent variable model |
| Alkuperäislähde≠ | Chen, G., Bliese, P. D. & Mathieu, J. E. (2005). Conceptual framework and statistical procedures for delineating and testing multilevel theories of homology. Organizational Research Methods, 8(4), 375–409. DOI ↗ | Jöreskog, K. G. (1969). A general approach to confirmatory maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 34(2), 183–202. DOI ↗ |
| Rinnakkaisnimet | cross-level construct validity, multilevel construct validation, MNV, nomological validity across levels | CFA, confirmatory FA, measurement model, restricted factor analysis |
| Liittyvät | 4 | 4 |
| Tiivistelmä≠ | Multilevel nomological validity evaluates whether a psychological construct and its network of theoretical relationships hold consistently across multiple levels of analysis — such as individual, team, and organization. It extends classical construct validation to nested data structures, ensuring that a measure means the same thing and behaves as theory predicts at each level. | 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. |
| ScholarGateAineisto ↗ |
|
|