Content area
Full text
Contents
- Abstract
- Construct Validation
- Contrast Analysis and Construct Validity
- Two Construct Validity Coefficients:r alerting-CV andr contrast-CV
- An Example
- The Impact of Larger and Smaller Correlations on the Two Measures of Construct Validity
- Discussion
- Advantages of Quantifying Construct Validity Using Contrast Analysis
- Caveats and Limitations
- Conclusions
- Appendix A
- Appendix B
Figures and Tables
Abstract
Construct validity is one of the most central concepts in psychology. Researchers generally establish the construct validity of a measure by correlating it with a number of other measures and arguing from the pattern of correlations that the measure is associated with these variables in theoretically predictable ways. This article presents 2 simple metrics for quantifying construct validity that provide effect size estimates indicating the extent to which the observed pattern of correlations in a convergent-discriminant validity matrix matches the theoretically predicted pattern of correlations. Both measures, based on contrast analysis, provide simple estimates of validity that can be compared across studies, constructs, and measures meta-analytically, and can be implemented without the use of complex statistical procedures that may limit their accessibility.
The best construct is the one around which we can build the greatest number of inferences, in the most direct fashion. (Cronbach & Meehl, 1955, p. 288)
Construct validity is one of the most important concepts in all of psychology. It is at the heart of any study in which researchers use a measure as an index of a variable that is not itself directly observable (e.g., intelligence, aggression, working memory). If a psychological test (or, more broadly, a psychological procedure, including an experimental manipulation) lacks construct validity, results obtained using this test or procedure will be difficult to interpret. Not surprisingly, the “construct” of construct validity has been the focus of theoretical and empirical attention for over half a century, especially in personality, clinical, educational, and organizational psychology, where measures of individual differences of hypothesized constructs are the bread and butter of research (Anastasi & Urbina, 1997; Cronbach & Meehl, 1955; Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994).
Yet, despite the importance...





