Construct Validity in Psychological Tests¶
Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct Validity in Psychological Tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52(4), 281-302.
Cited by¶
5 citations across 5 artifacts.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Construct Validity
- The signature is not a single test but a structured family of probes: convergent validity (does the measure agree with other measures of the same construct?), discriminant validity (does it diverge from measures of distinct constructs?), nomological validity (does it covary in theory-predicted ways with adjacent constructs?), face validity (does it look like the construct?), and predictive validity (does it forecast what the construct should forecast?).
This sourceFoundational paper introducing construct validity and the nomological network; defines convergent, discriminant, and nomological evidence.
- The signature is not a single test but a structured family of probes: convergent validity (does the measure agree with other measures of the same construct?), discriminant validity (does it diverge from measures of distinct constructs?), nomological validity (does it covary in theory-predicted ways with adjacent constructs?), face validity (does it look like the construct?), and predictive validity (does it forecast what the construct should forecast?).
- Validation
- Psychometrics & social science: Construct validity (does the instrument measure what it claims to measure?), convergent validity (does it correlate with related measures?), criterion validity (does it predict the outcome it purports to?), external validity (do findings generalize beyond the study sample?), a typology Cronbach and Meehl (1955) established in their canonical treatment of construct validity.
This sourceCanonical paper establishing the typology of construct, convergent, criterion, and content validity that anchors psychometric and social-science validation practice.
- Psychometrics & social science: Construct validity (does the instrument measure what it claims to measure?), convergent validity (does it correlate with related measures?), criterion validity (does it predict the outcome it purports to?), external validity (do findings generalize beyond the study sample?), a typology Cronbach and Meehl (1955) established in their canonical treatment of construct validity.
Mechanisms¶
- Alternate-Modality Sensing
- The guard is to require construct validity
This sourceDefines construct validity as evidence that a measure behaves as predicted by the theoretical construct it is intended to measure.
- The guard is to require construct validity
- Construct Mapping Table
- The construct-validity risk is real: a target-scale proxy can share a name with the source construct while capturing a different underlying thing.
This sourceShows that the same construct label can mask materially different underlying attributes.
- The construct-validity risk is real: a target-scale proxy can share a name with the source construct while capturing a different underlying thing.
- Factor-Structure or Latent-Model Check
- Its central trap is that *good fit is not right meaning
This sourceExplains that internal consistency alone does not establish what construct a test measures.
- Its central trap is that *good fit is not right meaning
Verification¶
This reference passed the adversarial substantiation pipeline: it was checked to exist and to support the claim it is attached to. See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:37701fa9764c · see in the full table