Improving construct validity: Cronbach, Meehl, and Neurath's ship.
Improving construct validity: Cronbach, Meehl, and Neurath's ship.
复制标题
提高结构有效性：Cronbach、Meehl 和 Neurath 的船。
DOI：
10.1037/1040-3590.17.4.409
复制
发表时间：
2005
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Rosenthal,Robert
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Westen,Drew;Rosenthal,Robert
Smith的文章”On Construct Validity：Issues of Method and Measurement”（见记录2005-16347-002）是对LJ Cronbach和PE Meehl（1955）的一个很好的致敬，它澄清了对结构效度理解的现状和未来方向。建构效度是一个动态的过程，拟合指数需要用于理解，而不是代替它。一项研究或一组研究未能支持一个建构，一项测量或其背后的理论，这允许有许多解释，科学家解释这种失败的方式容易产生认知偏见和动机推理。这就说明了为什么用来衡量观察结果与期望值匹配程度的指标可以成为科学判断的有用假体。正如PE Meehl（1954）在几十年前所指出的那样，定量的、统计的公式和指数往往优于非正式的、定性的判断，这同样适用于研究人员评估结构和测量的方式，也适用于咨询室的判断。（PsycINFO数据库记录（c）2019阿帕，保留所有权利）
Smith's article" On Construct Validity: Issues of Method and Measurement"(see record 2005-16347-002) is a fine tribute to LJ Cronbach and PE Meehl (1955) that clarifies the current state and future directions in the understanding of construct validity. Construct validity is a dynamic process, and fit indices need to be used at the service of understanding, not in place of it. The failure of a study or set of studies to support a construct, a measure, or the theory underlying it admits of many explanations, and the ways scientists interpret such failures are prone to cognitive biases and motivated reasoning. This suggests why metrics designed to index the extent to which observations match expectations can be useful prostheses to scientific judgments. As PE Meehl (1954) showed decades ago, quantitative, statistical formulas and indices tend to outperform informal, qualitative judgments, and this applies as much to the way researchers evaluate constructs and measures as to judgments in the consulting room.(PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved)