Rethinking psychological measurement: Validity potential versus realised validity

Area of Science:

• Psychological Sciences
• Measurement Theory
• Causal Inference

Background:

• Current measurement validation guidelines are complex, linking validity to interpretations of test scores.
• Existing practices may not clearly delineate requirements for valid measurement.
• A need exists for a more precise and interpretable framework for validity claims.

Purpose of the Study:

• To propose a novel, measurement-specific, and causal concept of validity.
• To enhance measurement validation practices in the psychological sciences.
• To clarify the requirements for valid measurement and the interpretation of validity claims.

Main Methods:

• Conceptual development based on Borsboom and colleagues' work.
• Distinction between validity potential (in abstracto) and realized validity (concrete outcomes).
• Application of interventionist theory of causation and causal inference for evaluation.

Main Results:

• A measurement-specific and causal concept of validity is proposed.
• The concept clarifies requirements for valid measurement and interpretation of claims.
• Distinction between potential and realized validity offers practical benefits for research.

Conclusions:

• The proposed concept offers a clearer, causal framework for measurement validation.
• It facilitates theoretical refinement, procedure selection, and reporting of validity evidence.
• This approach addresses challenges in evaluating psychological measurements as causal inferences.