Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Introduction

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Validating Psychological Constructs

  • 1042 Accesses

Abstract

Construct validity theory (CVT) is introduced, and the core concepts of the theory are described. Particular emphasis is placed on the psychological ‘construct’ concept and the ripple effects of its introduction into the psychological literature from the late 1940s to early 1950s. The chapter also provides a description of important discrepancies in the published literature concerning both the ‘construct’ concept and the utility of CVT as a validation framework. The role of CVT as a prominent theoretical paradigm is then situated within the broader histories of psychological measurement and testing validity theory and practice. Finally, the introductory chapter concludes with a description of the overall content and organization of the remainder of the book.

Construct validation is involved whenever a test is to be interpreted as a measure of some attribute or quality which is not “operationally defined.”

—Cronbach and Meehl (1955, p. 282)

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1985). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Psychological Association, American Educational Research Association, & National Council on Measurements Used in Education. (1954). Technical recommendations for psychological tests and diagnostic techniques. Psychological Bulletin, 51(2, Pt. 2), 1–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Psychological Association, American Educational Research Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1966). Standards for educational and psychological tests and manuals. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Psychological Association, American Educational Research Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1974). Standards for educational and psychological tests. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, S. J. (1933). The Rorschach method and the organization of personality. The American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 3, 361–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berka, K. (1983). Measurement: Its concepts, theories, and problems. Boston: Reidel.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, N. R. (1920). Foundations of science: The philosophy of theory and experiment. New York: Dover.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crocker, L., & Algina, J. (1986). Introduction to classical and modern test theory. Fort Worth: Harcourt Brace Javanovich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cronbach, L. J. (1971). Test validation. In R. L. Thorndike (Ed.), Educational measurement (2nd ed., pp. 443–507). Washington, DC: American Council on Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cronbach, L. J. (1988). Five perspectives on the validity argument. In H. Wainer & H. Braun (Eds.), Test validity (pp. 3–17). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cronbach, L. J. (1989). Construct validation after thirty years. In R. L. Linn (Ed.), Intelligence: Measurement theory and public policy: Proceedings of a symposium in honor of Lloyd G. Humphreys (pp. 147–171). Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity and psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52, 281–302.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Debreu, G. (1960). Topological methods in cardinal utility theory. In K. J. Arrow, S. Karlin, & P. Suppes (Eds.), Mathematical methods in the social sciences (pp. 16–26). Standford, CA: Standford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Embretson, S. E. (1983). Construct validity: Construct representation versus nomothetic span. Psychological Bulletin, 93, 179–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helmholtz, H. V. (1887/1977). Numbering and measuring from an epistemological viewpoint. In P. Hertz & M. Schlick (Eds.), Hermann von Helmholtz: Epistemological writings, Boston studies in the philosophy of science, (Vol. 37, pp. 72–114). Dordrecht-Holland: Reidel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hölder, O. (1901). Die axiome der qualitat und die lehre vom mass. Berichte der Sacksischen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften, Mathematische-Physicke Klase, 53, 1–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krantz, D. H. (1968). A survey of measurement theory. In G. B. Dantzig & A. F. Veinott (Eds.), Mathematics of the decision sciences, part 2 (pp. 314–350). New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krantz, D. H. (1991). From indices to mappings: The representational approach to measurement. In D. Brown & J. Smith (Eds.), Frontiers of mathematical psychology: Essays in honor of Clyde Coombs (pp. 1–52). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krantz, D. H., Luce, R. D., Suppes, P., & Tversky, A. (1971). Foundations of Measurement (Vol. I). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loevinger, J. (1957). Objective tests as instruments of psychological theory. Psychological Reports, 3, 635–694.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luce, R. D., & Tukey, J. W. (1964). Simultaneous conjoint measurement: A new type of fundamental measurement. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 1, 1–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maraun, M. D. (2003). Myths and confusions: Psychometrics and the latent variable model. Unpublished Manuscript. Retrieved from http://www.sfu.ca/~maraun/myths-and-confusions.html.

  • McDonald, R. P. (1999). Test theory: A unified treatment. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Messick, S. (1980). Test validity and the ethics of assessment. American Psychologist, 35, 1021–1027.

    Google Scholar 

  • Messick, S. (1981). Constructs and their vicissitudes in educational and psychological measurement. Psychological Bulletin, 89, 575–588.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Messick, S. (1988). The once and future issues of validity: Assessing the meaning and consequences of measurement. In H. Wainer & H. I. Braun (Eds.), Test Validity (pp. 33–46). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Messick, S. (1989a). Validity. In R. L. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement (3rd ed., pp. 13–103). New York: MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Messick, S. (1989b). Meaning and values in test validation: The science and ethics of assessment. Educational Researcher, 18, 5–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Messick, S. (1995). Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from persons’ responses and performances as scientific enquiry into score meaning. American Psychologist, 50, 741–749.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Messick, S. (1998). Test validity: A matter of consequence. Social Indicators Research, 45, 35–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michell, J. (1986). Measurement scales and statistics: A clash of paradigms. Psychological Bulletin, 100, 398–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michell, J. (1990). An introduction to the logic of psychological measurement. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michell, J. (1997). Quantitative science and the definition of measurement in psychology. British Journal of Psychology, 88, 355–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michell, J. (1999). Measurement in psychology: A critical history of a methodological concept. Cambridge, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Michell, J. (2003). The quantitative imperative: Positivism, naïve realism and the place of qualitative methods in psychology. Theory & Psychology, 13, 5–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michell, J. (2008). Is psychometrics pathological science? Measurement, 6, 7–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michell, J. (2009). The psychometrician’s fallacy: Too clever by half. British Journal of Mathematical and Statisitcal Psychology, 62, 41–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paulson, J. A. (1991). Is psychological measurement empirically possible? [Review of the book An introduction to the logic of psychological measurement, by J. Michell]. PsycCRITIQUES, 36, 1081–1082.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell, B. (1903). Principles of mathematics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slaney, K. L. (2012). Laying the cornerstone of construct validity theory: Herbert Feigl’s influence on early specifications. Theory and Psychology, 22, 290–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spearman, C. (1904a). The proof and measurement of association between two things. American Journal of Psychology, 15, 72–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spearman, C. (1904b). General intelligence, objectively determined and measured. American Journal of Psychology, 15, 201–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stevens, S. S. (1946). On the theory of scales of measurement. Science, 103, 677–680.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, M. E., & Smith, G. T. (2009). Construct validity: Advances in theory and methodology. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 5, 1–25.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC, Canada

    Kathleen Slaney

Authors
  1. Kathleen Slaney
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kathleen Slaney .

Copyright information

© 2017 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Slaney, K. (2017). Introduction. In: Validating Psychological Constructs. Palgrave Studies in the Theory and History of Psychology. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-38523-9_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation