Порівняння методів
Переглядайте обрані методи поруч; рядки з відмінностями підсвічено.
| Надійна номологічна валідність× | Конфірматорний факторний аналіз (КФА)× | |
|---|---|---|
| Галузь | Психометрія | Психометрія |
| Родина | Latent structure | Latent structure |
| Рік появи≠ | 1955 | 1969 |
| Автор методу≠ | Cronbach & Meehl (seminal framework); later extended by Shadish, Cook, and Campbell | Karl Gustav Jöreskog |
| Тип≠ | Validity assessment / construct validation | Hypothesis-testing latent variable model |
| Основоположне джерело≠ | Cronbach, L. J. & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52(4), 281–302. DOI ↗ | Jöreskog, K. G. (1969). A general approach to confirmatory maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 34(2), 183–202. DOI ↗ |
| Інші назви | nomological network validity, robust validity testing, nomological validity, RNV | CFA, confirmatory FA, measurement model, restricted factor analysis |
| Пов'язані≠ | 5 | 4 |
| Підсумок≠ | Robust nomological validity evaluates whether a psychological construct relates to theoretically expected variables in the predicted directions, using statistically robust estimation methods that remain trustworthy when distributional assumptions are violated. It tests the construct's place within its nomological network — the web of theoretical relationships that define its meaning. | Confirmatory factor analysis tests a researcher-specified factor structure against observed data. Unlike exploratory approaches, the researcher decides in advance which indicators load on which latent factor, and the model is evaluated by how closely the implied covariance matrix reproduces the sample covariance matrix. CFA is central to scale validation, construct validity assessment, and measurement invariance testing. |
| ScholarGateНабір даних ↗ |
|
|