A Review of Validity Evidence Presented in the Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology (2002–2012): Misconceptions and Recommendations for Validation Research

  • Gunnell K
  • Schellenberg B
  • Wilson P
  • et al.
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
14Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

This book combines an overview of validity theory, trends in validation practices, and a review of standards and guidelines in several international jurisdictions with research synthesis of the validity evidence in different research areas. An overview of theory is both useful and timely, in view of the increased use of tests and measures for decision-making, ranking, and policy purposes in large-scale testing, assessment, and social indicators and quality of life research. Research synthesis is needed to help us assemble, critically appraise, and integrate the overwhelming volume of research on validity in different contexts. Rather than examining whether any given measure is "valid", the focus is on a critical appraisal of the kinds of validity evidence reported in the published research literature. The five sources of validity evidence discussed are: content-related, response processes, internal structure, associations with other variables, and consequences. The 15 syntheses included here, represent a broad sampling of psychosocial, health, medical, and educational research settings, giving us an extensive evidential basis to build upon earlier studies. The book concludes with a meta-synthesis of the 15 syntheses, and a discussion of the current thinking of validation practices by leading experts in the field. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2015 APA, all rights reserved). (cover)

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Gunnell, K. E., Schellenberg, B. J. I., Wilson, P. M., Crocker, P. R. E., Mack, D. E., & Zumbo, B. D. (2014). A Review of Validity Evidence Presented in the Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology (2002–2012): Misconceptions and Recommendations for Validation Research (pp. 137–156). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07794-9_8

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free