Порівняння методів
Переглядайте обрані методи поруч; рядки з відмінностями підсвічено.
| Поздовжня penjelasan nomologічна валідність× | Валідність конструкту× | |
|---|---|---|
| Галузь | Психометрія | Психометрія |
| Родина | Latent structure | Latent structure |
| Рік появи≠ | 1955 (concept); longitudinal extension 1990s–2000s | 1955 |
| Автор методу≠ | Cronbach & Meehl (nomological network concept, 1955); longitudinal extension developed in organizational and personality research from the 1990s onward | Lee J. Cronbach & Paul E. Meehl |
| Тип≠ | Validity evaluation | Validity evaluation framework |
| Основоположне джерело≠ | Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52(4), 281–302. DOI ↗ | Cronbach, L. J. & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52(4), 281–302. DOI ↗ |
| Інші назви | longitudinal construct validity, nomological network validation across time, longitudinal criterion-related validity, temporal nomological validity | construct validation, factorial validity, nomological validity evidence, validity of interpretation |
| Пов'язані | 6 | 6 |
| Підсумок≠ | Longitudinal nomological validity evaluates whether a construct's theoretically predicted relationships with other constructs hold consistently across multiple measurement occasions. It extends the nomological network framework of Cronbach and Meehl (1955) to longitudinal designs, testing whether a scale behaves as theory demands not only at a single time point but over time. | 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. |
| ScholarGateНабір даних ↗ |
|
|