Comparer des méthodes
Examinez les méthodes sélectionnées côte à côte ; les lignes qui diffèrent sont mises en évidence.
| Validité nomologique× | Validité convergente× | |
|---|---|---|
| Domaine | Psychométrie | Psychométrie |
| Famille | Latent structure | Latent structure |
| Année d'origine≠ | 1955 | 1959 |
| Auteur d'origine≠ | Lee J. Cronbach & Paul E. Meehl | Donald T. Campbell & Donald W. Fiske |
| Type≠ | Validity evidence framework | Validity evidence / construct validation |
| Source fondatrice≠ | Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52(4), 281–302. DOI ↗ | Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56(2), 81–105. DOI ↗ |
| Alias | nomological network validity, construct network validity, nomological web validity | convergent construct validity, convergence validity, AVE-based convergent validity |
| Apparentées≠ | 6 | 4 |
| Résumé≠ | Nomological validity evaluates whether a construct behaves as theory predicts within a broader network of related constructs. It is not a single statistical test but an accumulation of evidence that the measure fits coherently into a web of theoretically grounded relationships — demonstrating that what is measured is what the theory says it should measure. | Convergent validity is the degree to which multiple indicators that are theoretically expected to measure the same construct actually correlate with one another. It is one of the two complementary forms of construct validity identified by Campbell and Fiske (1959) and is now routinely assessed via factor loadings and the Average Variance Extracted (AVE) statistic in SEM-based scale validation. |
| ScholarGateJeu de données ↗ |
|
|