Salīdzināt metodes
Apskatiet izvēlētās metodes blakus; rindas, kas atšķiras, ir izceltas.
| Īsās formas uzticamības analīze× | Apstiprinošā faktoru analīze (AFA)× | |
|---|---|---|
| Nozare | Psihometrija | Psihometrija |
| Saime | Latent structure | Latent structure |
| Izcelsmes gads≠ | 1990s–2000s | 1969 |
| Autors≠ | Conventional practice; codified notably by Smith, McCarthy & Anderson (2000) and Stanton et al. (2002) | Karl Gustav Jöreskog |
| Tips≠ | Scale development / psychometric evaluation | Hypothesis-testing latent variable model |
| Pirmavots≠ | Stanton, J. M., Sinar, E. F., Balzer, W. K. & Smith, P. C. (2002). Issues and strategies for reducing the length of self-report scales. Personnel Psychology, 55(1), 167–194. DOI ↗ | Jöreskog, K. G. (1969). A general approach to confirmatory maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 34(2), 183–202. DOI ↗ |
| Citi nosaukumi | abbreviated scale reliability, short-form validation, scale shortening, item reduction reliability | CFA, confirmatory FA, measurement model, restricted factor analysis |
| Saistītās≠ | 6 | 4 |
| Kopsavilkums≠ | Short-form reliability analysis evaluates whether an abbreviated version of a psychological scale maintains acceptable internal consistency, validity, and structural integrity after items are removed. It is used in survey and assessment research to create briefer instruments that reduce respondent burden without sacrificing measurement quality. | Confirmatory factor analysis tests a researcher-specified factor structure against observed data. Unlike exploratory approaches, the researcher decides in advance which indicators load on which latent factor, and the model is evaluated by how closely the implied covariance matrix reproduces the sample covariance matrix. CFA is central to scale validation, construct validity assessment, and measurement invariance testing. |
| ScholarGateDatu kopa ↗ |
|
|