The DOI matches its Crossref record; 23 of the 23 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Validity and washback in language testing
Abstract
Washback, a concept prominent in applied linguistics, refers to the extent to which the introduction and use of a test influences language teachers and learners to do things they would not otherwise do that promote or inhibit language learning. Some proponents have even maintained that a test's validity should be appraised by the degree to which it manifests positive or negative washback, a notion akin to the proposal of 'systemic validity' in the educational measurement literature. This article examines the concept of washback as an instance of the consequential aspect of construct validity, linking positive washback to so-called authentic and direct assessments and, more basically, to the need to minimize construct under- representation and construct-irrelevant difficulty in the test.
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
(1979) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 11,252
Review of research in education
Shulman, L. S., Mowry, S., & Berliner, D. C. (1973) · F.E. Peacock eBooks · Cited by 7,754
Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis issues for field settings
Shrout, P. E. (1980) · Evaluation and Program Planning · doi:10.1016/0149-7189(80)90063-4 · Cited by 6,010
Objective Tests as Instruments of Psychological Theory
Loevinger, J. (1957) · Psychological Reports · doi:10.2466/pr0.1957.3.3.635 · Cited by 1,473
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-citationAn argument-based approach to validity.
Kane, M. T. (1992) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.112.3.527 · Cited by 901
Test validity and the ethics of assessment.
Messick, S. (1980) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.35.11.1012 · Cited by 862
Self-citationALDERSON, J. C., & WALL, D. (1993) · Applied Linguistics · doi:10.1093/applin/14.2.115 · Cited by 847
A True Test: Toward More Authentic and Equitable Assessment
Wiggins, G. (2011) · Phi Delta Kappan · doi:10.1177/003172171109200721 · Cited by 820
Cited by
Social Presence: Conceptualization and Measurement
Kreijns, K., Xu, K., & Weidlich, J. (2022) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-021-09623-8 · Cited by 401
DEVELOPING ASSESSMENT LITERACY
Taylor, L. (2009) · Annual Review of Applied Linguistics · doi:10.1017/s0267190509090035 · Cited by 301
Test Validity: A Matter of Consequence
Messick, S. (1998) · Social Indicators Research · doi:10.1023/a:1006964925094 · Cited by 290
Self-citationKirkpatrick, R., & Zang, Y. (2011) · Language Testing in Asia · doi:10.1186/2229-0443-1-3-36 · Cited by 216
Teachers’ Conceptions of Fairness in Classroom Assessment: An Empirical Study
Rasooli, A., Rasegh, A., Zandi, H., & Firoozi, T. (2023) · Journal of Teacher Education · doi:10.1177/00224871221130742 · Cited by 30
Metadata
- Authors
- Messick, S.
- Venue
- Language Testing
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1996-11
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 241-256
- ISSN
- 0265-5322 (ISSN-L)
- 1477-0946
- OpenAlex
- W2131922494
- Cited by
- 867
- References
- 23
- FWCI
- 53.56
- 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: Validity and washback in language testing. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/026553229601300302
- The paper
- Messick, S. (1996). Validity and washback in language testing. Language Testing. https://doi.org/10.1177/026553229601300302
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.
