Compară metode
Examinează metodele selectate una lângă alta; rândurile care diferă sunt evidențiate.
| Validitate Convergentă Multilevel× | Validitatea de construct× | |
|---|---|---|
| Domeniu | Psihometrie | Psihometrie |
| Familie | Latent structure | Latent structure |
| Anul apariției≠ | 2005 | 1955 |
| Autorul original≠ | Dyer, Hanges & Hall; Chen, Bliese & Mathieu | Lee J. Cronbach & Paul E. Meehl |
| Tip≠ | Measurement validity evaluation | Validity evaluation framework |
| Sursa seminală≠ | 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 ↗ |
| Denumiri alternative≠ | cross-level convergent validity, multilevel measurement validity, between-level convergent validity | construct validation, factorial validity, nomological validity evidence, validity of interpretation |
| Înrudite≠ | 4 | 6 |
| Rezumat≠ | 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. |
| ScholarGateSet de date ↗ |
|
|