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。
| 简版构念效度× | 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≠ | 1990s–2000s | 1955 |
| 提出者≠ | Multiple contributors; Smith, McCarthy, & Anderson (2000) formalized short-form validation criteria | Lee J. Cronbach & Paul E. Meehl |
| 类型≠ | Validity assessment / scale shortening | Validity evaluation framework |
| 开创性文献≠ | Smith, G. T., McCarthy, D. M., & Anderson, K. G. (2000). On the sins of short-form development. Psychological Assessment, 12(1), 102–111. DOI ↗ | Cronbach, L. J. & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52(4), 281–302. DOI ↗ |
| 别名 | abbreviated scale construct validity, short-form scale validation, brief scale validity, short measure construct validation | construct validation, factorial validity, nomological validity evidence, validity of interpretation |
| 相关 | 6 | 6 |
| 摘要≠ | Short form construct validity is the systematic evaluation of whether an abbreviated version of a psychological scale still measures the same underlying construct as the original full-length instrument. It combines item selection procedures with confirmatory factor analysis, convergent and discriminant validity tests, and criterion-related evidence to demonstrate that scale shortening has not compromised the meaning of measurement. | 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 ↗ |
|
|