Salīdzināt metodes
Apskatiet izvēlētās metodes blakus; rindas, kas atšķiras, ir izceltas.
| Konstrukta validitāte× | Eksploratīvā faktoru analīze (EFA)× | |
|---|---|---|
| Nozare≠ | Psihometrija | Statistika |
| Saime | Latent structure | Latent structure |
| Izcelsmes gads≠ | 1955 | — |
| Autors≠ | Lee J. Cronbach & Paul E. Meehl | — |
| Tips≠ | Validity evaluation framework | Latent variable / dimension reduction |
| Pirmavots≠ | Cronbach, L. J. & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52(4), 281–302. DOI ↗ | Fabrigar, L. R., Wegener, D. T., MacCallum, R. C. & Strahan, E. J. (1999). Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 4(3), 272–299. DOI ↗ |
| Citi nosaukumi≠ | construct validation, factorial validity, nomological validity evidence, validity of interpretation | common factor analysis, açımlayıcı faktör analizi, factor analysis |
| Saistītās≠ | 6 | 4 |
| Kopsavilkums≠ | 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. | Exploratory factor analysis reduces a large set of observed variables into a smaller number of latent common factors. It is widely used in scale development and psychometrics to uncover the dimensional structure that underlies a set of correlated items, without specifying that structure in advance. |
| ScholarGateDatu kopa ↗ |
|
|