Repositioning Construct Validity Theory: From Nomological Networks to Pragmatic Theories and Their Evaluation by Explanatory Means.

In this article, I argue for a number of important changes to the conceptual foundations of construct validity theory. I begin by suggesting that construct validity theorists should shift their attention from the validation of constructs to the process of evaluating scientific theories. This shift in focus is facilitated by distinguishing construct validation (understood as theory evaluation) from test validation, thereby freeing it from its long-standing focus on psychological measurement. In repositioning construct validity theory in this way, researchers should jettison the outmoded but superficially popular notion that theories are nomological networks in favor of a more plausible pragmatic view of their natures, such as the idea that theories are explanatorily coherent networks. Consistent with this shift in understanding the nature of theories, my recommendation is that construct validation should embrace an explanationist perspective on the theory evaluation process to complement its focus on hypothetico-deductive theory testing. On this view, abductive research methods have an important role to play. The revisionist perspective on construct validity proposed here is discussed in light of relevant developments in scientific methodology and is applied to an influential account of the validation process that has shaped research practice.