The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Frontiers of Test Validity Theory
Abstract
This book examines test validity in the behavioral, social, and educational sciences by exploring three fundamental problems: measurement, causation and meaning. Psychometric and philosophical perspectives receive attention along with unresolved issues. The authors explore how measurement is conceived from both the classical and modern perspectives. The importance of understanding the underlying concepts as well as the practical challenges of test construction and use receive emphasis throughout. The book summarizes the current state of the test validity theory field. Necessary background on test theory and statistics is presented as a conceptual overview where needed. Each chapter begins with an overview of key material reviewed in previous chapters, concludes with a list of suggested readings, and features boxes with examples that connect theory to practice. These examples reflect actual situations that occurred in psychology, education, and other disciplines in the US and around the globe, bringing theory to life. Critical thinking questions related to the boxed material engage and challenge readers. A few examples include: What is the difference between intelligence and IQ? Can people disagree on issues of value but agree on issues of test validity? Is it possible to ask the same question in two different languages? The first part of the book contrasts theories of measurement as applied to the validity of behavioral science measures.The next part considers causal theories…
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 most cases, validating indicators requires establishing a correlation between the indicator and the target state, which entails measuring both under varying conditions and checking for reliable correlation.
“In most cases, when validating indicators all that is needed is to establish a correlation between the indicator and the target state. This entails measurement of both the indicator and the target under varying conditions and checking for reliable correlation (Markus and Borsboom 2013).”
From The Measurement Problem of Consciousness (2020) · cites this paper as Markus and Borsboom 2013
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Measurement Problem of Consciousness
Browning, H., Veit, W., & University of Arkansas Press (2020) · Philosophical Topics · doi:10.5840/philtopics20204815 · Cited by 78
Metadata
- Authors
- Markus, K. A., & Borsboom, D.
- Venue
- Routledge eBooks
- Publisher
- Routledge
- Published
- 2013-06-19
- OpenAlex
- W4231079698
- Cited by
- 248
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 35 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 2
- FWCI
- 5.44
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Routledge eBooks (publishedVersion)
- CERN Document Server (European Organization for Nuclear Research) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Social Sciences › Education › Educational Assessment and Pedagogy
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Psychological Testing and Assessment
- Keywords
- test validity, measurement theory, causal theories, score interpretation, test development, psychometrics
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