According to the 1999 Standards, validation is the process of gathering evidence to provide “a sound scientific basis” for interpreting the scores as proposed by the test developer and/or the test user.Validation therefore begins with a framework that defines the scope and aspects (in the case of multi-dimensional scales) of the proposed interpretation.The name "Q" comes from the form of factor analysis that is used to analyze the data.
The modern models reorganize classical "validities" into either "aspects" of validity Although psychologists and educators were aware of several facets of validity before World War II, their methods for establishing validity were commonly restricted to correlations of test scores with some known criterion.
attempted to clarify and broaden the scope of validity by dividing it into four parts: (a) concurrent validity, (b) predictive validity, (c) content validity, and (d) construct validity.
If the test, and/or the interpretations of the test’s results are revised in any way, a new validation process must gather evidence to support the new version.
Assessment | Biopsychology | Comparative | Cognitive | Developmental | Language | Individual differences | Personality | Philosophy | Social | Methods | Statistics | Clinical | Educational | Industrial | Professional items | World psychology | Social Processes: Methodology · Types of test Q Methodology is a research method used in psychology and other social sciences to study people's "subjectivity" -- that is, their viewpoint.
The framework also includes a rational justification linking the interpretation to the test in question.
Validity researchers then list a series of propositions that must be met if the interpretation is to be valid.
Since concourses do not have clear membership lists (as would be the case in the population of subjects), statements cannot be drawn randomly.
Commonly Q methodologists use a structured sampling approach in order to ensure that they include the full breadth of the concourse.
Each piece of evidence is finally integrated into a validity argument.
The argument may call for a revision to the test, its administration protocol, or the theoretical constructs underlying the interpretations.
In studies of intelligence, Q factor analysis can generate Consensus based assessment (CBA) scores as direct measures.