Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,263

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The empirical assessment of construct validity

O'Leary‐Kelly, Scott W, J. Vokurka, Robert·1998·Journal of Operations Management

Abstract

This paper provides an in‐depth review of the different methods available for assessing the construct validity of measures used in empirical research. Construct validity pertains to the degree to which the measure of a construct sufficiently measures the intended concept (e.g., is free of measurement error) and has been shown to be a necessary component of the research process. In order to illustrate the steps required to establish construct validity, we drew upon empirical research in the operations management area of manufacturing flexibility.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0272-6963(98)00020-5

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 1,263

Metadata

Authors
O'Leary‐Kelly, S. W., & J. Vokurka, R.
Venue
Journal of Operations Management
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1998-07
Volume
16
Issue
4
Pages
387-405
ISSN
  • 0272-6963 (ISSN-L)
  • 1873-1317
OpenAlex
W2161813612
Cited by
1,263
References
4
FWCI
6.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.