{"title":"建构效度与重复研究的效度:系统回顾。","authors":"J. Flake, I. Davidson, O. Wong, J. Pek","doi":"10.1037/amp0001006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Currently, there is little guidance for navigating measurement challenges that threaten construct validity in replication research. To identify common challenges and ultimately strengthen replication research, we conducted a systematic review of the measures used in the 100 original and replication studies from the Reproducibility Project: Psychology (Open Science Collaboration, 2015). Results indicate that it was common for scales used in the original studies to have little or no validity evidence. Our systematic review demonstrates and corroborates evidence that issues of construct validity are sorely neglected in original and replicated research. We identify four measurement challenges replicators are likely to face: a lack of essential measurement information, a lack of validity evidence, measurement differences, and translation. Next, we offer solutions for addressing these challenges that will improve measurement practices in original and replication research. Finally, we close with a discussion of the need to develop measurement methodologies for the next generation of replication research. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).","PeriodicalId":217617,"journal":{"name":"The American psychologist","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"25","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Construct validity and the validity of replication studies: A systematic review.\",\"authors\":\"J. Flake, I. Davidson, O. Wong, J. Pek\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/amp0001006\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Currently, there is little guidance for navigating measurement challenges that threaten construct validity in replication research. To identify common challenges and ultimately strengthen replication research, we conducted a systematic review of the measures used in the 100 original and replication studies from the Reproducibility Project: Psychology (Open Science Collaboration, 2015). Results indicate that it was common for scales used in the original studies to have little or no validity evidence. Our systematic review demonstrates and corroborates evidence that issues of construct validity are sorely neglected in original and replicated research. We identify four measurement challenges replicators are likely to face: a lack of essential measurement information, a lack of validity evidence, measurement differences, and translation. Next, we offer solutions for addressing these challenges that will improve measurement practices in original and replication research. Finally, we close with a discussion of the need to develop measurement methodologies for the next generation of replication research. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).\",\"PeriodicalId\":217617,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The American psychologist\",\"volume\":\"17 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"25\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The American psychologist\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0001006\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The American psychologist","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0001006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 25
摘要
目前,在复制研究中,对于如何应对威胁结构效度的测量挑战缺乏指导。为了确定共同的挑战并最终加强复制研究,我们对可重复性项目:心理学(开放科学合作,2015)的100项原始和复制研究中使用的措施进行了系统回顾。结果表明,原始研究中使用的量表通常只有很少或没有有效证据。我们的系统综述证明并证实了构造效度问题在原始和重复研究中被严重忽视的证据。我们确定了复制者可能面临的四个测量挑战:缺乏必要的测量信息,缺乏有效性证据,测量差异和翻译。接下来,我们将提供解决这些挑战的解决方案,这些解决方案将改善原始和复制研究中的测量实践。最后,我们讨论了为下一代复制研究开发测量方法的必要性。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA,版权所有)。
Construct validity and the validity of replication studies: A systematic review.
Currently, there is little guidance for navigating measurement challenges that threaten construct validity in replication research. To identify common challenges and ultimately strengthen replication research, we conducted a systematic review of the measures used in the 100 original and replication studies from the Reproducibility Project: Psychology (Open Science Collaboration, 2015). Results indicate that it was common for scales used in the original studies to have little or no validity evidence. Our systematic review demonstrates and corroborates evidence that issues of construct validity are sorely neglected in original and replicated research. We identify four measurement challenges replicators are likely to face: a lack of essential measurement information, a lack of validity evidence, measurement differences, and translation. Next, we offer solutions for addressing these challenges that will improve measurement practices in original and replication research. Finally, we close with a discussion of the need to develop measurement methodologies for the next generation of replication research. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).