CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 929Psychometric Methodologies and TestingMeta-analysis and systematic reviewsMental Health Research Topics

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 50 of the 50 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

THEORY TESTING: COMBINING PSYCHOMETRIC META‐ANALYSIS AND STRUCTURAL EQUATIONS MODELING

VISWESVARAN, CHOCKALINGAM, ONES, DENIZ S.·1995·Personnel Psychology
DOI 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1995.tb01784.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This paper presents an overview of a useful approach for theory testing in the social sciences that combines the principles of psychometric meta‐analysis and structural equations modeling. In this approach to theory testing, the estimated true score correlations between the constructs of interest are established through the application of meta‐analysis (Hunter & Schmidt, 1990), and structural equations modeling is then applied to the matrix of estimated true score correlations. The potential advantages and limitations of this approach are presented. The approach enables researchers to test complex theories involving several constructs that cannot all be measured in a single study. Decision points are identified, the options available to a researcher are enumerated, and the potential problems as well as the prospects of each are discussed.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1995.tb01784.x

Cites

50 of 50 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 9

  1. Bentler PM, 1989, Theory and implementation of EQS: A structural equations program [Computer software]
  2. Burke MJ, 1994, An empirical estimation of the effect of second order sampling error on ASVAB‐training proficiency validity estimates
  3. Jensen AR, 1980, Bias in mental testing
  4. Jöreskog KG, 1986, LISREL 6 user's guide: Analysis of linear shuctural relationships by the method of muximum likelihood
  5. Nunnally JC, 1978, Psychometric theory
  6. Oakes M., 1986, Statistical inference: A commentary for the social and behavioral sciences
  7. OnesDS. (1993).The construct validity of integriy tests. Unpublished doctoral dissertation University of Iowa Iowa City.
  8. SchmidtFL. (in press).Quantitative methods and cumulative knowledge in psychology: Implications for the training of researchers.Psychological Methods.
  9. SchmidtFL HunterJE. (in press).Measurement error in industrial/organizational psychology research: Lessons from 26 research scenarios.Psychological Methods.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 929

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
VISWESVARAN, C., & ONES, D. S.
Affiliations
Florida International University (US)
Corresponding author
VISWESVARAN, CHOCKALINGAM
ORCID
VISWESVARAN, CHOCKALINGAM
Venue
Personnel Psychology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1995-12
Volume
48
Issue
4
Pages
865-885
ISSN
  • 0031-5826 (ISSN-L)
  • 1744-6570
DOI
10.1111/j.1744-6570.1995.tb01784.x
OpenAlex
W2051295428
Cited by
926
References
50
Citations by year
2026: 34 · 2025: 42 · 2024: 46 · 2023: 42 · 2022: 66 · 2021: 46 · 2020: 49 · 2019: 48 · 2018: 45 · 2017: 58 · 2016: 45 · 2015: 51 · 2014: 45 · 2013: 36 · 2012: 36
FWCI
7.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor, 4024 d)
Locations
Personnel Psychology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Mental Health Research Topics
Keywords
theory testing, structural equation modeling, complex theory

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