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。
| 多层列联效度× | 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≠ | 2005 | 1955 |
| 提出者≠ | Chen, Bliese & Mathieu (building on Cronbach & Meehl) | Lee J. Cronbach & Paul E. Meehl |
| 类型≠ | Validity assessment / construct validation | Validity evaluation framework |
| 开创性文献≠ | Chen, G., Bliese, P. D. & Mathieu, J. E. (2005). Conceptual framework and statistical procedures for delineating and testing multilevel theories of homology. Organizational Research Methods, 8(4), 375–409. DOI ↗ | Cronbach, L. J. & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52(4), 281–302. DOI ↗ |
| 别名 | cross-level construct validity, multilevel construct validation, MNV, nomological validity across levels | construct validation, factorial validity, nomological validity evidence, validity of interpretation |
| 相关≠ | 4 | 6 |
| 摘要≠ | Multilevel nomological validity evaluates whether a psychological construct and its network of theoretical relationships hold consistently across multiple levels of analysis — such as individual, team, and organization. It extends classical construct validation to nested data structures, ensuring that a measure means the same thing and behaves as theory predicts at each level. | 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 ↗ |
|
|