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。
| 多群体区分效度评估× | 构念效度× | |
|---|---|---|
| 领域 | 心理测量学 | 心理测量学 |
| 方法族 | Latent structure | Latent structure |
| 起源年份≠ | 1981 (foundational criterion); multi-group extension 1990s–2000s | 1955 |
| 提出者≠ | Fornell & Larcker (for the AVE-based criterion); extended to multi-group settings by the SEM invariance literature | Lee J. Cronbach & Paul E. Meehl |
| 类型≠ | Validity assessment / model comparison | Validity evaluation framework |
| 开创性文献≠ | Fornell, C. & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. DOI ↗ | Cronbach, L. J. & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52(4), 281–302. DOI ↗ |
| 别名 | cross-group discriminant validity, multi-sample discriminant validity, MGDV, discriminant validity across groups | construct validation, factorial validity, nomological validity evidence, validity of interpretation |
| 相关≠ | 5 | 6 |
| 摘要≠ | Multi-group discriminant validity assessment tests whether constructs measured by a scale are empirically distinct not just in one sample but consistently across two or more groups (e.g., cultures, genders, age cohorts). It extends standard discriminant validity criteria — such as the AVE rule and the HTMT ratio — into a multi-group confirmatory factor analysis framework to verify that conceptual distinctness is replicable across subpopulations. | 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. |
| ScholarGate数据集 ↗ |
|
|