Vertaile menetelmiä
Tarkastele valitsemiasi menetelmiä rinnakkain; eroavat rivit korostetaan.
| Lyhytversion sisällön validiteetti× | Käsitevaliditeetti× | |
|---|---|---|
| Tieteenala | Psykometriikka | Psykometriikka |
| Menetelmäperhe | Latent structure | Latent structure |
| Syntyvuosi≠ | 1995–2000 | 1955 |
| Kehittäjä≠ | Messick (validity framework); Smith et al. (short-form standards) | Lee J. Cronbach & Paul E. Meehl |
| Tyyppi≠ | Validity evaluation | Validity evaluation framework |
| Alkuperäislähde≠ | Smith, G. T., McCarthy, D. M., & Anderson, K. G. (2000). On the sins of short-form development. Psychological Assessment, 12(1), 102–111. DOI ↗ | Cronbach, L. J. & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52(4), 281–302. DOI ↗ |
| Rinnakkaisnimet | abbreviated scale content validity, short-scale content coverage, brief form content validity, content validity for short forms | construct validation, factorial validity, nomological validity evidence, validity of interpretation |
| Liittyvät | 6 | 6 |
| Tiivistelmä≠ | 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. | 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. |
| ScholarGateAineisto ↗ |
|
|