The DOI matches its Crossref record; 33 of the 33 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from persons' responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning.
Abstract
The traditional conception of validity divides it into three separate and substitutable types—namely, content, criterion, and construct validities. This view is fragmented and incomplete, especially because it fails to take into account both evidence of the value implications of score meaning as a basis for action and the social consequences of score use. The new unified concept of validity interrelates these issues as fundamental aspects of a more comprehensive theory of construct validity that addresses both score meaning and social values in test interpretation and test use. That is, unified validity integrates considerations of content, criteria, and consequences into a construct framework for the empirical testing of rational hypotheses about score meaning and theoretically relevant relationships, including those of an applied and a scientific nature. Six distinguishable aspects of construct validity are highlighted as a means of addressing central issues implicit in the notion of validity as a unified concept. These are content, substantive, structural, generalizability, external, and consequential aspects of construct validity. In effect, these six aspects function as general validity criteria or standards for all educational and psychological measurement, including performance assessments, which are discussed in some detail because of their increasing emphasis in educational and employment settings.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“This is fundamentally a construct-validity problem: neighboring measures should support distinct interpretations within a nomological network rather than be treated as interchangeable indicators (Cronbach and Meehl, 1955; Messick, 1995).”
From Beyond checking: verification quality, reliance calibration, and learning in generative AI-assisted higher education (2026) · cites this paper as Messick, 1995
In the citing paper
“Contemporary validity theory positions assessment consequences as integral to assessment quality rather than external to it (Hubley and Zumbo, 2011; Messick, 1995).”
From Reducing classification risk in developmental performance assessment using fuzzy logic: evidence from preservice mathematics teacher education (2026) · cites this paper as Messick, 1995
In the citing paper
“This was explicitly argued by Messick (1995), as he emphasized a unified concept of construct validity that integrates the traditional single conceptions, namely content, criterion, and construct validities.”
From Taking a future perspective by learning from the past – A systematic review of assessment instruments that aim to measure primary and secondary school students' ICT literacy (2016) · cites this paper as Messick, 1995
In the citing paper
“This definition indicates that all phases of the assessment development framework, for instance, are important for establishing an argument for how well the measures derived from an assessment reflect the construct of interest.”
From Taking a future perspective by learning from the past – A systematic review of assessment instruments that aim to measure primary and secondary school students' ICT literacy (2016) · cites this paper as Messick, 1995
In the citing paper
“computer-based assessments have the potential to provide better evidence for construct validity, by collecting data describing how students approach tasks when they are involved in solving real-world problems”
From Taking a future perspective by learning from the past – A systematic review of assessment instruments that aim to measure primary and secondary school students' ICT literacy (2016) · cites this paper as Messick, 1995
Citations
Cites
Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix.
Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0046016 · Cited by 17,116
Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology.
Hammer, T. H., Anderson, J. F., Gurdon, M. A., Jick, T. D., Petit, A., Stern, R. N., Schwartz, H., Vardi, Y., & Dunnette, M. D. (1977) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2391755 · Cited by 11,947
(1979) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 11,252
Construct validity in psychological tests.
Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0040957 · Cited by 11,195
Perception and the Representative Design of Psychological Experiments
Brunswik, E. (1956) · doi:10.1525/9780520350519 · Cited by 2,974
Educational measurement, 3rd ed.
Linn, R. L. (1989) · Cited by 2,858
Differential Item Functioning.
Gudgeon, A. C., Holland, P. W., & Wainer, H. (1994) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series D (The Statistician) · doi:10.2307/2348590 · Cited by 2,088
Objective Tests as Instruments of Psychological Theory
Loevinger, J. (1957) · Psychological Reports · doi:10.2466/pr0.1957.3.3.635 · Cited by 1,476
The interplay of evidence and consequences in the validation of performance assessments
Messick, S. (1994) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x023002013 · Cited by 1,315
Self-citationMeaning and Values in Test Validation: The Science and Ethics of Assessment
Messick, S. (1989) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x018002005 · Cited by 948
Self-citationTest validity and the ethics of assessment.
Messick, S. (1980) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.35.11.1012 · Cited by 922
Self-citationThe Design of Inquiring Systems: Basic Concepts of Systems and Organization
Stevens, E., & Churchman, C. W. (1975) · American Educational Research Journal · doi:10.2307/1162585 · Cited by 863
Psychological Tests and Personnel Decisions.
Ashton, G. C., Cronbach, L. J., & Gleser, C. (1968) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2528052 · Cited by 715
Fehr, H. F. (1948) · Mathematics Teacher Learning and Teaching PK-12 · doi:10.5951/mt.41.6.0270 · Cited by 646
Construct validity: Construct representation versus nomothetic span.
Whitely, S. E. (1983) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.93.1.179 · Cited by 605
Argument-Based Approach to Validity
Kane, M. T. (2022) · The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design · doi:10.4135/9781071812082.n28 · Cited by 557
Shepard, L. A. (1993) · Review of Research in Education · doi:10.2307/1167347 · Cited by 480
The standard problem: Meaning and values in measurement and evaluation.
Messick, S. (1975) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.30.10.955 · Cited by 418
Self-citationCONSTRUCT VALIDITY: CONSTRUCT REPRESENTATION VERSUS NOMOTHETIC SPAN
Embretson, S. E. (1983) · Cited by 322
Implications of cognitive psychology for educational measurement.
Snow, R. E., & Lohman, D. F. (1989) · Cited by 312
(1989) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.27-1601 · Cited by 271
Assessment: Authenticity, Context, and Validity.
Wiggins, G. (1993) · Phi Delta Kappan · Cited by 255
Within-group norming and other forms of score adjustment in preemployment testing.
Sackett, P. R., & Wilk, S. L. (1994) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.49.11.929 · Cited by 230
Construct validation after thirty years.
Cronbach, L. J. (1989) · Cited by 225
Representative and Quasi-Representative Designs for Research on Teaching
Snow, R. E. (1974) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/00346543044003265 · Cited by 213
Test Theory for a New Generation of Tests.
Gudgeon, A. C., Fredericksen, N., Mislevy, R. J., & Bejar, I. I. (1994) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series D (The Statistician) · doi:10.2307/2348147 · Cited by 193
Research Methods in the Behavioral Sciences.
Nehněvajsa, J., Festinger, L., & Katz, D. M. (1954) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2088409 · Cited by 176
Reconstruction of Educational Research
Shulman, L. S. (1970) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/00346543040003371 · Cited by 137
Assumptions Underlying the Use of Content Validity
Lennon, R. T. (1956) · Educational and Psychological Measurement · doi:10.1177/001316445601600303 · Cited by 110
Statistical Implications of Six Methods of Test Score use in Personnel Selection
Cascio, W. F., Outtz, J. L., Zedeck, S., et al. (1991) · Human Performance · doi:10.1207/s15327043hup0404_1 · Cited by 101
The science and politics of race-norming.
Gottfredson, L. S. (1994) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.49.11.955 · Cited by 75
Why All Banding Procedures in Personnel Selection Are Logically Flawed
Schmidt, F. L. (1991) · Human Performance · doi:10.1207/s15327043hup0404_2 · Cited by 49
Representations and Models in Psychology
Suppes, P., Pavel, M., & Falmagne, J. (1994) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.ps.45.020194.002505 · Cited by 22
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Toward a definition of mixed methods research
Johnson, R. B., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Turner, L. A. (2007) · Journal of Mixed Methods Research · doi:10.1177/1558689806298224 · Cited by 6,464
Boateng, G. O., Neilands, T. B., Frongillo, E. A., Melgar-Quiñonez, H. R., & Young, S. L. (2018) · Frontiers in Public Health · doi:10.3389/fpubh.2018.00149 · Cited by 5,925
Mokkink, L. B., Terwee, C. B., Patrick, D. L., Alonso, J., Stratford, P. W., Knol, D. L., Bouter, L. M., & de Vet, H. C. W. (2010) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.02.006 · Cited by 4,465
Psychometric assessment of three newly developed implementation outcome measures
Weiner, B. J., Lewis, C. C., Stanick, C., Powell, B. J., Dorsey, C. N., Clary, A. S., Boynton, M. H., & Halko, H. (2017) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/s13012-017-0635-3 · Cited by 2,819
Introducing the Short Dark Triad (SD3): A Brief Measure of Dark Personality Traits
Jones, D. N., & Paulhus, D. L. (2014) · Assessment · doi:10.1177/1073191113514105 · Cited by 2,162
Metadata
- Authors
- Messick, S.
- Affiliations
- Educational Testing Service (US)
- Corresponding author
- Messick, Samuel
- Venue
- American Psychologist
- Published
- 1995-09
- Volume
- 50
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 741-749
- ISSN
- 0003-066X (ISSN-L)
- 1935-990X
- OpenAlex
- W2028829385
- Cited by
- 4,198
- References
- 33
- Citations by year
- 2026: 411 · 2025: 181 · 2024: 163 · 2023: 164 · 2022: 168 · 2021: 183 · 2020: 190 · 2019: 228 · 2018: 219 · 2017: 218 · 2016: 202 · 2015: 198 · 2014: 192 · 2013: 158 · 2012: 165
- FWCI
- 45.60
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- American Psychologist (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Psychological Testing and Assessment
- Social Sciences › Education › Educational Assessment and Pedagogy
- Keywords
- construct validity, content validity, criterion validity, consequential validity, performance evaluation (human resources), test interpretation, validity criteria
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
