השוואת שיטות
סקרו את השיטות שבחרתם זו לצד זו; שורות שבהן יש הבדל מודגשות.
| תוקף מתכנס רב-רמתי× | תוקף מבנה× | |
|---|---|---|
| תחום | פסיכומטריה | פסיכומטריה |
| משפחה | Latent structure | Latent structure |
| שנת המקור≠ | 2005 | 1955 |
| הוגה השיטה≠ | Dyer, Hanges & Hall; Chen, Bliese & Mathieu | Lee J. Cronbach & Paul E. Meehl |
| סוג≠ | Measurement validity evaluation | Validity evaluation framework |
| מקור מכונן≠ | Dyer, N. G., Hanges, P. J. & Hall, R. J. (2005). Applying multilevel confirmatory factor analysis techniques to the study of leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 16(1), 149–167. DOI ↗ | Cronbach, L. J. & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52(4), 281–302. DOI ↗ |
| כינויים≠ | cross-level convergent validity, multilevel measurement validity, between-level convergent validity | construct validation, factorial validity, nomological validity evidence, validity of interpretation |
| קשורות≠ | 4 | 6 |
| תקציר≠ | Multilevel convergent validity evaluates whether items or scales intended to measure the same construct show coherent, strong associations at each level of a nested data structure — within individuals, within groups, and between groups. It extends classical convergent validity from single-level measurement models into the multilevel confirmatory factor analysis (ML-CFA) framework. | 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. |
| ScholarGateמערך נתונים ↗ |
|
|