เปรียบเทียบวิธี
ดูวิธีที่เลือกเทียบกันแบบเคียงข้าง แถวที่ต่างกันจะถูกเน้นไว้
| ความตรงเชิงเนื้อหาแบบหลายกลุ่ม× | ระเบียบวิธีเดลฟาย× | |
|---|---|---|
| สาขาวิชา≠ | การวัดทางจิตวิทยา | เชิงคุณภาพ |
| ตระกูล≠ | Latent structure | Process / pipeline |
| ปีกำเนิด≠ | 1986–2006 | 1963 |
| ผู้ริเริ่ม≠ | Lynn (1986); extended by Polit & Beck (2006) | Norman Dalkey & Olaf Helmer (RAND Corporation) |
| ประเภท≠ | Validity assessment / expert judgment aggregation | Structured iterative expert-elicitation process |
| แหล่งต้นตำรับ≠ | Polit, D. F. & Beck, C. T. (2006). The content validity index: Are you sure you know what's being reported? Critique and recommendations. Research in Nursing & Health, 29(5), 489–497. DOI ↗ | Dalkey, N. & Helmer, O. (1963). An Experimental Application of the Delphi Method to the Use of Experts. Management Science, 9(3), 458-467. DOI ↗ |
| ชื่อเรียกอื่น≠ | multi-group CVI, cross-group content validity, subgroup content validity index, multi-panel content validity | Delphi Yöntemi, Delphi technique, expert consensus method |
| ที่เกี่ยวข้อง≠ | 4 | 5 |
| สรุป≠ | Multi-group content validity extends the standard content validity index (CVI) procedure by computing and comparing item- and scale-level validity indices across two or more distinct expert panels or subgroups. It ensures that a scale's items are judged as relevant and representative not only overall but also within each subgroup of interest, supporting cross-group generalizability of the instrument. | The Delphi method is a structured, iterative survey technique developed by Norman Dalkey and Olaf Helmer at the RAND Corporation in 1963 for eliciting and converging expert opinion on complex topics where empirical data are unavailable or insufficient. It collects independent judgements from a geographically dispersed expert panel over multiple anonymous rounds, feeding aggregated results back to participants after each round so they can revise their views in light of the group's collective position. |
| ScholarGateชุดข้อมูล ↗ |
|
|