This Article Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Marsh, H. W. Articles by Butler, S. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Evaluating Reading Diagnostic Tests: An Application of Confirmatory Factor Analysis To Multitrait-Multimethod Data

The University of Sydney

Susan Butler

The University of Sydney

Diagnostic reading tests, in contrast to achievement tests, claim to measure specific components of ability hypothesized to be important for diagnosis or remedia tion. A minimal condition for demonstrating the con struct validity of such tests is that they are able to dif ferentiate validly between the reading traits that they claim to measure (e.g., comprehension, sound dis crimination, blending). This condition is rarely tested, but multitrait-multimethod (MTMM) designs are ideally suited for this purpose. This is demonstrated in two studies based on the 1966 version of the Stanford Diagnostic Reading Test (SDRT). In each study, the application of the Campbell-Fiske guidelines and con firmatory factor analysis (CFA) to the MTMM data in dicated that the SDRT subscales could be explained in terms of a method/halo effect and a general reading factor that was not specific to any of the subscales; this refutes the construct validity of the 1966 version of the SDRT as a diagnostic test. Other diagnostic tests probably suffer the same weakness and should also be evaluated in MTMM studies.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				F. Guay Motivations Underlying Career Decision-Making Activities: The Career Decision-Making Autonomy Scale (CDMAS) Journal of Career Assessment, February 1, 2005; 13(1): 77 - 97. [Abstract] [PDF]

				C. Huang and W. B. Michael Multitrait-Multimethod Analyses of Scores on a Chinese Version of the Dimensions of Self-Concept Scale Educational and Psychological Measurement, April 1, 2002; 62(2): 355 - 372. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. M. Conway Analysis and Design of Multitrait-Multirater Performance Appraisal Studies Journal of Management, February 1, 1996; 22(1): 139 - 162. [Abstract] [PDF]

				H. W. Marsh and M. Bailey Confirmatory Factor Analyses of Multitrait-Multimethod Data: A Comparison of Alternative Models Applied Psychological Measurement, March 1, 1991; 15(1): 47 - 70. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. R. Buckley, J. A. Cote, and S. M. Comstock Measurement Errors in the Behavioral Sciences: The Case of Personality/Attitude Research Educational and Psychological Measurement, September 1, 1990; 50(3): 447 - 474. [Abstract]

				H. W. Marsh Confirmatory Factor Analyses of Multitrait-Multimethod Data: Many Problems and a Few Solutions Applied Psychological Measurement, December 1, 1989; 13(4): 335 - 361. [Abstract]