So sánh phương pháp
Xem các phương pháp đã chọn cạnh nhau; những hàng khác biệt được làm nổi bật.
| Độ tin cậy phân biệt mạnh mẽ× | Tính hợp lệ của cấu trúc× | |
|---|---|---|
| Lĩnh vực | Trắc lượng tâm lý | Trắc lượng tâm lý |
| Họ | Latent structure | Latent structure |
| Năm ra đời≠ | 1959 (foundational); 2015 (HTMT criterion) | 1955 |
| Người khởi xướng≠ | Henseler, Ringle & Sarstedt (HTMT); Campbell & Fiske (foundational framework) | Lee J. Cronbach & Paul E. Meehl |
| Loại≠ | Validity assessment / measurement quality criterion | Validity evaluation framework |
| Công trình gốc≠ | Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M. & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135. DOI ↗ | Cronbach, L. J. & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52(4), 281–302. DOI ↗ |
| Tên gọi khác | HTMT criterion, heterotrait-monotrait ratio, discriminant validity testing, RDV | construct validation, factorial validity, nomological validity evidence, validity of interpretation |
| Liên quan≠ | 4 | 6 |
| Tóm tắt≠ | Robust discriminant validity assessment determines whether distinct latent constructs in a measurement model are sufficiently different from one another. Unlike traditional AVE-based approaches, robust methods such as the Heterotrait-Monotrait (HTMT) ratio use the pattern of inter-indicator correlations to provide a more sensitive and simulation-validated criterion for judging discriminant validity in structural equation modeling contexts. | 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. |
| ScholarGateBộ dữ liệu ↗ |
|
|