Compară metode
Examinează metodele selectate una lângă alta; rândurile care diferă sunt evidențiate.
| Validitatea discriminantă multinivelară× | Analiza Factorială Confirmatorie Multilevel (MCFA)× | |
|---|---|---|
| Domeniu | Psihometrie | Psihometrie |
| Familie | Latent structure | Latent structure |
| Anul apariției≠ | 2005 | 1994 |
| Autorul original≠ | Dyer, Hanges, & Hall; Chen, Sousa, & West | Bengt O. Muthen |
| Tip≠ | Validity evaluation within multilevel CFA | Latent variable model / measurement model |
| 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 ↗ | Muthen, B. O. (1994). Multilevel covariance structure analysis. Sociological Methods & Research, 22(3), 376–398. DOI ↗ |
| Denumiri alternative | multilevel DV, cross-level discriminant validity, hierarchical discriminant validity, ML-DV | MCFA, multilevel measurement model, two-level CFA, hierarchical CFA |
| Înrudite≠ | 5 | 6 |
| Rezumat≠ | Multilevel discriminant validity evaluates whether theoretically distinct constructs are empirically separable when data are nested within higher-level units such as teams, schools, or organizations. It extends single-level discriminant validity checks into a multilevel confirmatory factor analysis framework, verifying that constructs are distinguishable both within and between levels simultaneously. | Multilevel confirmatory factor analysis tests a pre-specified factor structure while simultaneously accounting for the non-independence of observations caused by clustered data. It decomposes item variance into within-group and between-group components, fitting a separate measurement model at each level, making it the standard tool for validating psychometric scales administered within natural groups such as classrooms, clinics, or organisations. |
| ScholarGateSet de date ↗ |
|
|