Construct Validity and Content Analysis

Construct Validity and Content Analysis

We clarify points of agreement and disagreement with Schnurr, Rosenberg, and Oxman, as put forth in their article appearing this issue. Speech samples elicited under different conditions may or may not be interchangeable. This is a matter of empirical research, but it is also dependent upon the mean...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of personality assessment 1993-10, Vol.61 (2), p.243-245
Hauptverfasser: McAdams, Dan P., Zeldow, Peter B.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Biological and medical sciences
Medical sciences
Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry
Psychometrics. Diagnostic aid systems
Psychopathology. Psychiatry
Techniques and methods
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:We clarify points of agreement and disagreement with Schnurr, Rosenberg, and Oxman, as put forth in their article appearing this issue. Speech samples elicited under different conditions may or may not be interchangeable. This is a matter of empirical research, but it is also dependent upon the meaningfulness of the content categories. used in the analysis. We prefer a theory-driven, construct validational approach that employs well validated coding schemes to assess psychologically meaningful concepts.
ISSN:0022-3891
1532-7752
DOI:10.1207/s15327752jpa6102_5