Vertaile menetelmiä
Tarkastele valitsemiasi menetelmiä rinnakkain; eroavat rivit korostetaan.
| Lyhyt nomologinen validiteetti× | Vahvistava faktorianalyysi (CFA)× | |
|---|---|---|
| Tieteenala | Psykometriikka | Psykometriikka |
| Menetelmäperhe | Latent structure | Latent structure |
| Syntyvuosi≠ | 1955 (concept); 2000 (short-form context) | 1969 |
| Kehittäjä≠ | Cronbach & Meehl (nomological network concept); Smith et al. for short-form application | Karl Gustav Jöreskog |
| Tyyppi≠ | Validity assessment technique | Hypothesis-testing latent variable model |
| Alkuperäislähde≠ | 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 ↗ |
| Rinnakkaisnimet | nomological validity of abbreviated scales, short-scale construct validity, nomological network validity, abbreviated form external validity | CFA, confirmatory FA, measurement model, restricted factor analysis |
| Liittyvät | 4 | 4 |
| Tiivistelmä≠ | Short form nomological validity examines whether an abbreviated version of a psychological scale preserves the pattern of theoretically expected correlations with conceptually related and unrelated constructs. It is a cornerstone step in justifying the use of a shortened instrument in research and applied settings. | 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 ↗ |
|
|