On construct validity: issues of method and measurement
Related Experiment Videos
1Department of Psychology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, 40506-0044, USA. gsmith@uky.edu
Abstract:
Fifty years ago, L. J. Cronbach and P. E. Meehl (1955) advocated for the concept of construct validity, noting that psychologists study hypothetical, inferred entities and that validating measures of such entities involves basic theory testing. Three important developments in clinical assessment following that seminal article are noteworthy. First, clinical research has benefited from greater theoretical integration and subsequent differentiation among related constructs. Second, implementation of ongoing, critical evaluation of all aspects of the construct validity process, including theory development, hypothesis specification, research design, and empirical evaluation, has improved clinical assessment. Third, improvement in evaluating fit between hypotheses and observations has been sought. Improved means of evaluating multitrait, multimethod designs, and ways to increase their clinical representativeness, are one encouraging development. Ongoing efforts to improve the construct validity process reflect the legacy of L. J. Cronbach and P. E. Meehl.
Related Concept Videos
Reliability and Validity
Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...
Data Validation
Key parameters for method validation include:
Measures of Intelligence
Validity refers to how well a test measures what it claims to measure. An intelligence test should accurately assess intelligence rather than another characteristic, like anxiety. Criterion validity is one way to evaluate this; it...
Random and Systematic Errors
Random and Systematic Errors