Сравнение методов
Просматривайте выбранные методы рядом; строки с различиями подсвечены.
| Содержательная валидность× | Конструктная валидность× | |
|---|---|---|
| Область | Психометрия | Психометрия |
| Семейство | Latent structure | Latent structure |
| Год появления≠ | 1975 | 1955 |
| Автор метода≠ | C. H. Lawshe (quantitative framework); earlier qualitative traditions in educational measurement | Lee J. Cronbach & Paul E. Meehl |
| Тип≠ | Validity evidence / expert judgement procedure | Validity evaluation framework |
| Основополагающий источник≠ | Lawshe, C. H. (1975). A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel Psychology, 28(4), 563–575. link ↗ | Cronbach, L. J. & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52(4), 281–302. DOI ↗ |
| Другие названия | content-related validity, logical validity, face validity, content validation | construct validation, factorial validity, nomological validity evidence, validity of interpretation |
| Связанные | 6 | 6 |
| Сводка≠ | Content validity is evidence that a measurement instrument adequately samples the full domain of the construct it is intended to measure. It is established through systematic expert review and quantified with indices such as Lawshe's Content Validity Ratio (CVR) and Lynn's Content Validity Index (CVI), making it the foundational validity step in scale development. | 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. |
| ScholarGateНабор данных ↗ |
|
|