Looking for a Consensus in the Discussion About the Concept of Validity: A Delphi Study

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS
Sandra Liliana Camargo, A. Herrera, A. Traynor
{"title":"Looking for a Consensus in the Discussion About the Concept of Validity: A Delphi Study","authors":"Sandra Liliana Camargo, A. Herrera, A. Traynor","doi":"10.1027/1614-2241/a000157","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of this work is to identify issues regarding the concept of validity in educational and psychological testing on which there is, and is not, consensus among experts, using an online Delphi study. Although many theorists have expressed their views about the proper characterization of validity, it is important to systematically collect ideas about each aspect of validity. Study participants were recognized academic experts who have led the discussion on the concept of validity in publications and academic meetings in Europe and the United States during recent decades. The Delphi study’s results identify some aspects of the concept of validity, the Standards (2014), and validation about which experts are at an impasse, and others about which consensus can be reached. Based on our findings, some recommendations to advance the conceptualization of validity are offered.","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2018-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-2241/a000157","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

The purpose of this work is to identify issues regarding the concept of validity in educational and psychological testing on which there is, and is not, consensus among experts, using an online Delphi study. Although many theorists have expressed their views about the proper characterization of validity, it is important to systematically collect ideas about each aspect of validity. Study participants were recognized academic experts who have led the discussion on the concept of validity in publications and academic meetings in Europe and the United States during recent decades. The Delphi study’s results identify some aspects of the concept of validity, the Standards (2014), and validation about which experts are at an impasse, and others about which consensus can be reached. Based on our findings, some recommendations to advance the conceptualization of validity are offered.
在效度概念讨论中寻求共识:德尔菲研究
这项工作的目的是确定关于教育和心理测试的有效性概念的问题,其中有,并不是,专家之间的共识,使用在线德尔菲研究。尽管许多理论家都对有效性的正确表征表达了自己的观点,但系统地收集关于有效性各个方面的观点是很重要的。研究参与者是公认的学术专家,他们在近几十年来在欧洲和美国的出版物和学术会议上领导了对效度概念的讨论。德尔菲研究的结果确定了效度概念、标准(2014)和验证的某些方面,即哪些专家处于僵局,哪些可以达成共识。在此基础上,提出了一些建议,以促进效度概念的概念化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信