方法对比
并排查看您选择的方法；存在差异的行会高亮显示。
| 多组内容效度× | 德尔菲法× | |
|---|---|---|
| 领域≠ | 心理测量学 | 质性 |
| 方法族≠ | Latent structure | Process / pipeline |
| 起源年份≠ | 1986–2006 | 1963 |
| 提出者≠ | Lynn (1986); extended by Polit & Beck (2006) | Norman Dalkey & Olaf Helmer (RAND Corporation) |
| 类型≠ | Validity assessment / expert judgment aggregation | Structured iterative expert-elicitation process |
| 开创性文献≠ | 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 ↗ |
| 别名≠ | multi-group CVI, cross-group content validity, subgroup content validity index, multi-panel content validity | Delphi Yöntemi, Delphi technique, expert consensus method |
| 相关≠ | 4 | 5 |
| 摘要≠ | 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. |
| ScholarGate数据集 ↗ |
|
|