Abstract
Validity is a term that is often invoked in decisions to use neuropsychological tests. Unfortunately, the context of this use is usually negative, as when a test is cited as invalid. The use of the term implies that a test can be determined to be either valid or invalid. Of course, most clinical neuropsychologists agree that a test that is “valid” for one population may be “invalid” for another. If this is true, can a test ever be evaluated as universally valid or invalid? A second question relates to how a test is evaluated as valid or invalid. This is a question of both method (How do we evaluate a test?) and of epistemology (How do we know what we know?). Although method may be discussed separately from epistemology, the obverse is not necessarily true. That is, how we know something is highly related to how we investigate that something. This chapter discusses general issues in the relationship between epistemology and method, and Chapter 5 discusses the methodological issues more directly.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2000 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Franzen, M.D. (2000). Elemental Considerations in Validity. In: Reliability and Validity in Neuropsychological Assessment. Critical Issues in Neuropsychology. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-3224-5_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-3224-5_4
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4419-3341-6
Online ISBN: 978-1-4757-3224-5
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive