ScholarGate
Asistent

Uporedite metode

Pregledajte izabrane metode jednu pored druge; redovi koji se razlikuju su istaknuti.

Sadržinska valjanost×Konstruktna validnost×
OblastPsihometrijaPsihometrija
PorodicaLatent structureLatent structure
Godina nastanka19751955
TvoracC. H. Lawshe (quantitative framework); earlier qualitative traditions in educational measurementLee J. Cronbach & Paul E. Meehl
TipValidity evidence / expert judgement procedureValidity evaluation framework
Temeljni izvorLawshe, 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 ↗
Drugi nazivicontent-related validity, logical validity, face validity, content validationconstruct validation, factorial validity, nomological validity evidence, validity of interpretation
Srodne66
SažetakContent 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.
ScholarGateSkup podataka
  1. v1
  2. 2 Izvori
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 2 Izvori
  3. PUBLISHED

Idi na pretragu Download slides

ScholarGateUporedite metode: Content Validity · Construct Validity. Preuzeto 2026-06-15 sa https://scholargate.app/sr/compare