The Logic of Latent Variable Analysis as Validity Evidence in Psychological Measurement

Author:

Baghaei Purya,Tabatabaee Yazdi Mona

Abstract

Background:Validity is the most important characteristic of tests and social science researchers have a general consensus of opinion that the trustworthiness of any substantive research depends on the validity of the instruments employed to gather the data.Objective:It is a common practice among psychologists and educationalists to provide validity evidence for their instruments by fitting a latent trait model such as exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis or the Rasch model. However, there has been little discussion on the rationale behind model fitting and its use as validity evidence. The purpose of this paper is to answer the question: why the fit of data to a latent trait model counts as validity evidence for a test?Method:To answer this question latent trait theory and validity concept as delineated by Borsboom and his colleagues in a number of publications between 2003 to 2013 is reviewed.Results:Validating psychological tests employing latent trait models rests on the assumption of conditional independence. If this assumption holds it means that there is a ‘common cause’ underlying the co-variation among the test items, which hopefully is our intended construct.Conclusion:Providing validity evidence by fitting latent trait models is logistically easy and straightforward. However, it is of paramount importance that researchers appreciate what they do and imply about their measures when they demonstrate that their data fit a model. This helps them to avoid unforeseen pitfalls and draw logical conclusions.

Publisher

Bentham Science Publishers Ltd.

Subject

General Psychology

Reference31 articles.

1. Kelley TL. Interpretation of educational measurements. New York: Macmillan 1927.

2. Guilford JP. New standards for test evaluation. Educ Psychol Meas 1946; 6 : 427-39.

3. Cronbach LJ, Meehl PE. Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychol Bull 1955; 52 (4) : 281-302.

4. Messick S. Validity. In: Linn IR, Ed. Educational measurement Washington. DC: American Council on Education and National Council on Measurement in Education 1989; pp. 13-103.

5. Kane MT. Validation. In: Brennan IR, Ed. Educational measurement Washington. DC: American Council on Education and National Council on Measurement in Education 2006; pp. 17-64.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3