Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-b6zl4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-08T10:06:07.134Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

K. Slaney, (2017). Validating Psychological Constructs: Historical, philosophical, and practical dimensions. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. 308 pp. US$99.99 (US$79.99 eBook). ISBN: 978-1-137-38522-2.

Review products

K. Slaney, (2017). Validating Psychological Constructs: Historical, philosophical, and practical dimensions. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. 308 pp. US$99.99 (US$79.99 eBook). ISBN: 978-1-137-38522-2.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2025

Ian James Davidson Open the ORCID record for Ian James Davidson [Opens in a new window]
Ian James Davidson*
Affiliation:
York University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Book Review
Information
Psychometrika , Volume 83 , Issue 1 , March 2018 , pp. 272 - 274
Copyright
Copyright © 2017 The Psychometric Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

American Psychological Association, American Educational Research Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1954). Technical recommendations for psychological tests and diagnostic techniques (Vol. 51). American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borsboom, D., Cramer, A. O., Kievit, R. A., and Scholten, A., & Franic, S., (2009). The end of construct validity. In Lissitz, R. W. (Ed.), The concept of validity: Revisions, new directions, and applications (pp. 135–170). Charlotte, NC, USA: IAP Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
Cronbach, L., Meehl, P., (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests, Psychological Bulletin, 52(4) 281–302.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Driver-Linn, E., (2003). Where is the psychology going? Structural fault lines revealed by psychologists’ use of Kuhn, American Psychologist, 58(4) 269–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flake, J.K., Pek, J., Hehman, E., (2017). Construct validation in social and personality research: Current practice and recommendations, Social Psychological and Personality Science, 8(4) 370–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leahey, T.H., (1992). The mythical revolutions of American psychology, American Psychologist, 47(2) 308–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacCorquodale, K., Meehl, P.E., (1948). On a distinction between hypothetical constructs and intervening variables, Psychological Review, 55(2) 95.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Maraun, M.D., Gabriel, S.M., (2013). Illegitimate concept equating in the partial fusion of construct validation theory and latent variable modeling, New Ideas in Psychology, 31(1) 32–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maraun, M.D., Halpin, P.F., (2008). Manifest and latent variates, Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 6, 113–117.Google Scholar
Markus, K.A., Borsboom, D., (2013); Frontiers of test validity theory: Measurement, causation, and meaning, London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Messick, S. eds.Linn, R.L., (1989). Validity, Educational measurement, 3New York, NY: MacMillan 13–103.Google Scholar
Michell, J., (1999). Measurement in psychology: A critical history of a methodological concept, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newton, P., Shaw, S., (2014). Validity in educational and psychological assessment, London: SAGE Publications Ltd.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peak, H., (1953). Problems of objective observation, In Festinger, L., Katz, D.(Eds.), Research methods in behavioral sciences, New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston 243–299.Google Scholar
Raven, J., (2008). General introduction and overview: The Raven Progressive Matrices Tests: Their theoretical basis and measurement model. In Raven, J., Raven, J.(Eds.), Uses and abuses of intelligence: Studies advancing Spearman and Raven’s quest for non-arbitrary metrics, Unionville, NY, USA: Royal Fireworks Press 17–68.Google Scholar
Whitely, S.E., (1983). Construct validity: Construct representation versus nomothetic span, Psychological Bulletin, 93(1) 179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar