השוואת שיטות
סקרו את השיטות שבחרתם זו לצד זו; שורות שבהן יש הבדל מודגשות.
| תוקף תוכן אורכי× | תוקף תוכן× | |
|---|---|---|
| תחום | פסיכומטריה | פסיכומטריה |
| משפחה | Latent structure | Latent structure |
| שנת המקור≠ | 1995–2000 | 1975 |
| הוגה השיטה≠ | Haynes, Richard & Kubany (1995); extended to longitudinal contexts by measurement invariance researchers | C. H. Lawshe (quantitative framework); earlier qualitative traditions in educational measurement |
| סוג≠ | Validity evaluation technique | Validity evidence / expert judgement procedure |
| מקור מכונן≠ | Haynes, S. N., Richard, D. C. S., & Kubany, E. S. (1995). Content validity in psychological assessment: A functional approach to concepts and methods. Psychological Assessment, 7(3), 238–247. DOI ↗ | Lawshe, C. H. (1975). A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel Psychology, 28(4), 563–575. link ↗ |
| כינויים | longitudinal content validation, temporal content validity, repeated-measure content validity, content validity over time | content-related validity, logical validity, face validity, content validation |
| קשורות | 6 | 6 |
| תקציר≠ | Longitudinal content validity evaluates whether the items of a measure adequately and consistently represent the intended content domain not only at a single point in time but across repeated administrations. It ensures that the conceptual coverage of a scale remains appropriate and stable as measurement occasions accumulate over a study period. | Content validity is evidence that a measurement instrument adequately samples the full domain of the construct it is intended to measure. It is established through systematic expert review and quantified with indices such as Lawshe's Content Validity Ratio (CVR) and Lynn's Content Validity Index (CVI), making it the foundational validity step in scale development. |
| ScholarGateמערך נתונים ↗ |
|
|