ScholarGate
助手

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。

序数内容效度评估×内容效度比×
领域心理测量学心理测量学
方法族Latent structureProcess / pipeline
起源年份20031975
提出者Wynd, Schmidt & SchaeferCharles H. Lawshe
类型Scale validation / content validityExpert panel content validity assessment
开创性文献Wynd, C. A., Schmidt, B., & Schaefer, M. A. (2003). Two quantitative approaches for estimating content validity. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 25(5), 508–518. DOI ↗Lawshe, C. H. (1975). A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel Psychology, 28(4), 563-575. link ↗
别名ordinal CVI, Likert-scale content validity, ordinal expert rating validity, graded content validityCVR, Content validity index, Expert judgment content validity, Lawshe CVR
相关44
摘要Ordinal content validity replaces the traditional binary (yes/no) expert relevance judgment with a graded, Likert-type rating scale, allowing richer expert opinion to be captured when evaluating whether scale items adequately represent the intended construct domain.The Content Validity Ratio (CVR) is a quantitative method developed by Charles Lawshe in 1975 for evaluating the extent to which items in a measurement instrument are relevant and representative of a target construct. The method aggregates expert panel judgments into a single validity coefficient for each item, enabling researchers to identify and retain only those items deemed essential by domain experts. CVR provides objective support for content validity claims during scale development.
ScholarGate数据集
  1. v1
  2. 2 来源
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 3 来源
  3. PUBLISHED

前往搜索 下载幻灯片

ScholarGate方法对比: Ordinal Content Validity · Content Validity Ratio. 于 2026-06-17 检索自 https://scholargate.app/zh/compare