The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Incremental Validity of Psychological Testing and Assessment: Conceptual, Methodological, and Statistical Issues.
Abstract
There has been insufficient effort in most areas of applied psychology to evaluate incremental validity. To further this kind of validity research, the authors examined applicable research designs, including those to assess the incremental validity of test instruments, of test-informed clinical inferences, and of newly developed measures. The authors also considered key statistical and measurement issues that can influence incremental validity findings, including the entry order of predictor variables, how to interpret the size of a validity increment, and possible artifactual effects in the criteria selected for incremental validity research. The authors concluded by suggesting steps for building a cumulative research base concerning incremental validity and by describing challenges associated with applying nomothetic research findings to individual clinical cases.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
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
Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (1998) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037//0033-2909.124.2.262 · Cited by 4,180
“Clinical versus Actuarial Judgment.”
Dawes, R. M., Faust, D., & Meehl, P. E. (1989) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.2648573 · Cited by 2,298
Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (1993) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.48.12.1181 · Cited by 2,033
Behavioral Development and Construct Validity: The Principle of Aggregation
Rushton, J. P., Brainerd, C. J., & Pressley, M. (1983) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.94.1.18 · Cited by 940 · cited 1×
“As originally presented by Sechrest (1963) and Wiggins (1973), incremental validity was conceptualized as an applied form of validity, inasmuch as the purpose of incremental validity was to provide evidence pertinent to improving on decision making and prediction tasks.”
BackgroundThe treatment utility of assessment: A functional approach to evaluating assessment quality.
Hayes, S. C., Nelson, R. O., & Jarrett, R. B. (1987) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.42.11.963 · Cited by 486
Stepwise Regression and Stepwise Discriminant Analysis Need Not Apply here: A Guidelines Editorial
Thompson, B. (1995) · Educational and Psychological Measurement · doi:10.1177/0013164495055004001 · Cited by 434
Principles and Practice of Behavioral Assessment
Haynes, S. N., & O’Brien, W. H. (2000) · Applied Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1007/978-0-306-47469-9 · Cited by 272
Treatment utility of psychological assessment
Nelson-Gray, R. O. (2003) · Psychological Assessment · doi:10.1037/1040-3590.15.4.521 · Cited by 138
Cited by
Constructing validity: New developments in creating objective measuring instruments.
Clark, L. A., & Watson, D. (2019) · Psychological Assessment · doi:10.1037/pas0000626 · Cited by 1,470
Hoch, J. E., Bommer, W. H., Dulebohn, J. H., & Wu, D. (2018) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206316665461 · Cited by 1,364
Statistically controlling for confounding constructs is harder than you think
Westfall, J., & Yarkoni, T. (2016) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0152719 · Cited by 547
Lee, S. A., Jobe, M. C., Mathis, A. A., & Gibbons, J. A. (2020) · Journal of Anxiety Disorders · doi:10.1016/j.janxdis.2020.102268 · Cited by 392
“Three separate hierarchical multiple regression analyses were performed based on Hunsley and Meyer’s (2003) incremental validity approach. The first step of the regression analyses included the sociodemographic variables of age, gender (1=women; 0=men and other), ethnicity (1=White; 0= non-White), and education (1= Ba…”
InfluentialPsychological and Health Outcomes of Perceived Information Overload
Misra, S., & Stokols, D. (2012) · Environment and Behavior · doi:10.1177/0013916511404408 · Cited by 350
Metadata
- Authors
- Hunsley, J., & Meyer, G. J.
- Venue
- Psychological Assessment
- Published
- 2003-12
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 446-455
- ISSN
- 1040-3590 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-134X
- OpenAlex
- W2089038806
- Cited by
- 561
- References
- 9
- FWCI
- 13.51
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Incremental Validity of Psychological Testing and Assessment: Conceptual, Methodological, and Statistical Issues. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1037/1040-3590.15.4.446
- The paper
- Hunsley, J., & Meyer, G. J. (2003). The Incremental Validity of Psychological Testing and Assessment: Conceptual, Methodological, and Statistical Issues. Psychological Assessment. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.15.4.446
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.
