Encyclopedia of Personality and Individual Differences

Living Edition
| Editors: Virgil Zeigler-Hill, Todd K. Shackelford

Discriminant Validity

  • Melanie BaumgartenEmail author
  • Eunike Wetzel
Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28099-8_1298-1



Discriminant validity is established when test scores representing different constructs assessed with the same or different measurement methods are unrelated or demonstrate only small correlations.


Validity refers to the degree to which the information provided by a test score that is extracted from a test or other modes of assessment adequately represents the construct it is supposed to measure. Traditionally, three main types of validity have been distinguished: criterion, content, and construct validity (Cronbach and Meehl 1955; see Validity, Criterion Validity, Content Validity, Construct Validity). Some authors (AERA, APA, & NCME 2014; Messick 1995) have subsumed content- and criterion-related evidence under construct validity, implying that construct validity can be considered the core of validity. According to this conceptualization, all of the different kinds of validity...

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


  1. 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
  2. Biesanz, J. C., & West, S. G. (2004). Towards understanding assessments of the Big Five: Multitrait-multimethod analyses of convergent and discriminant validity across measurement occasion and type of observer. Journal of Personality, 72, 845–876.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56, 81–105.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52, 281–302.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Messick, S. (1995). Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from persons’ responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. American Psychologist, 50, 741–749.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ziegler, M., Booth, T., & Bensch, D. (2013). Getting entangled in the nomological net: Thoughts on validity and conceptual overlap. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 29, 157–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Otto-von-Guericke University MagdeburgMagdeburgGermany
  2. 2.Universität KonstanzKonstanzGermany

Section editors and affiliations

  • Matthias Ziegler
    • 1
  1. 1.Humboldt Universität zu BerlinBerlinGermany