手法を比較
選択した手法を並べて確認できます。異なる行はハイライト表示されます。
| 多群内容妥当性× | Delphi Method× | |
|---|---|---|
| 分野≠ | 心理測定学 | 質的手法 |
| 系統≠ | Latent structure | Process / pipeline |
| 提唱年≠ | 1986–2006 | 1963 |
| 提唱者≠ | Lynn (1986); extended by Polit & Beck (2006) | Norman Dalkey & Olaf Helmer (RAND Corporation) |
| 種類≠ | Validity assessment / expert judgment aggregation | Structured iterative expert-elicitation process |
| 原典≠ | Polit, D. F. & Beck, C. T. (2006). The content validity index: Are you sure you know what's being reported? Critique and recommendations. Research in Nursing & Health, 29(5), 489–497. DOI ↗ | Dalkey, N. & Helmer, O. (1963). An Experimental Application of the Delphi Method to the Use of Experts. Management Science, 9(3), 458-467. DOI ↗ |
| 別名≠ | multi-group CVI, cross-group content validity, subgroup content validity index, multi-panel content validity | Delphi Yöntemi, Delphi technique, expert consensus method |
| 関連≠ | 4 | 5 |
| 概要≠ | Multi-group content validity extends the standard content validity index (CVI) procedure by computing and comparing item- and scale-level validity indices across two or more distinct expert panels or subgroups. It ensures that a scale's items are judged as relevant and representative not only overall but also within each subgroup of interest, supporting cross-group generalizability of the instrument. | The Delphi method is a structured, iterative survey technique developed by Norman Dalkey and Olaf Helmer at the RAND Corporation in 1963 for eliciting and converging expert opinion on complex topics where empirical data are unavailable or insufficient. It collects independent judgements from a geographically dispersed expert panel over multiple anonymous rounds, feeding aggregated results back to participants after each round so they can revise their views in light of the group's collective position. |
| ScholarGateデータセット ↗ |
|
|