Vertaile menetelmiä
Tarkastele valitsemiasi menetelmiä rinnakkain; eroavat rivit korostetaan.
| Lyhytlomakkeen kehittäminen× | Vahvistava faktorianalyysi (CFA)× | |
|---|---|---|
| Tieteenala | Psykometriikka | Psykometriikka |
| Menetelmäperhe | Latent structure | Latent structure |
| Syntyvuosi≠ | 1990s–2000s | 1969 |
| Kehittäjä≠ | Multiple contributors; foundational critique by Smith, McCarthy & Anderson (2000); practical guidance by Stanton et al. (2002) | Karl Gustav Jöreskog |
| Tyyppi≠ | Scale development methodology | Hypothesis-testing latent variable model |
| Alkuperäislähde≠ | Stanton, J. M., Sinar, E. F., Balzer, W. K., & Smith, P. C. (2002). Issues and strategies for reducing the length of self-report scales. Personnel Psychology, 55(1), 167–194. DOI ↗ | Jöreskog, K. G. (1969). A general approach to confirmatory maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 34(2), 183–202. DOI ↗ |
| Rinnakkaisnimet | scale abbreviation, abbreviated scale development, short-scale construction, item reduction methodology | CFA, confirmatory FA, measurement model, restricted factor analysis |
| Liittyvät≠ | 5 | 4 |
| Tiivistelmä≠ | Short-form scale development is the systematic process of reducing a full-length psychological scale to a smaller subset of items while preserving the construct validity, reliability, and measurement properties of the original instrument. It is widely used when administration burden must be minimised without sacrificing psychometric quality. | 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 ↗ |
|
|