Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for FREE ACCESS to this landmark database

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Applied Psychological Measurement
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Linn, R. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Issues of Validity for Criterion-Referenced Measures

Robert L. Linn

University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign

It has sometimes been assumed that validity of criterion-referenced tests is guaranteed by the de finition of the domain and the process used to gen erate items. These are important considerations for content validity. It is argued that the proper focus for content validity is on the items of a test rather than on examinee responses to those items. Content validity is important for criterion-referenced mea sures, but it is not sufficient. This claim is dis cussed and the case is made that interpretations and uses of criterion-referenced tests require sup port of other kinds of evidence and logical analysis. The inferences that are made should dictate the kinds of evidence and logical arguments that are needed to support claims of validity. Illustrations of aspects of the validation process are provided in two concrete examples.

Applied Psychological Measurement, Vol. 4, No. 4, 547-561 (1980)
DOI: 10.1177/014662168000400407
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL AND BEHAVIORAL STATISTICSHome page
R. Janssen, F. Tuerlinckx, M. Meulders, and P. De Boeck
A Hierarchical IRT Model for Criterion-Referenced Measurement
Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, January 1, 2000; 25(3): 285 - 306.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 REVIEW OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCHHome page
P. A. Moss
Shifting Conceptions of Validity in Educational Measurement: Implications for Performance Assessment
Review of Educational Research, January 1, 1992; 62(3): 229 - 258.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Eval Health ProfHome page
R. K. Hambleton and H. J. Rogers
Technical Advances in Credentialing Examinations
Eval Health Prof, June 1, 1986; 9(2): 205 - 229.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Journal of Psychoeducational AssessmentHome page
A. M. Murray and S. P. Mishra
Item Bias in Individually Administered Ability Tests: Implications for Nondiscriminatory Assessment
Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, December 1, 1983; 1(4): 353 - 366.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Applied Psychological MeasurementHome page
A. R. Fitzpatrick
The Meaning of Content Validity
Applied Psychological Measurement, January 1, 1983; 7(1): 3 - 13.
[Abstract]