Authors
Uljana Feest
Universität Hannover
Abstract
This paper looks at the question of what it means for a psychological test to have construct validity. I approach this topic by way of an analysis of recent debates about the measurement of implicit social cognition. After showing that there is little theoretical agreement about implicit social cognition, and that the predictive validity of implicit tests appears to be low, I turn to a debate about their construct validity. I show that there are two questions at stake: First, what level of detail and precision does a construct have to possess such that a test can in principle be valid relative to it? And second, what kind of evidence needs to be in place such that a test can be regarded as validated relative to a given construct? I argue that construct validity is not an all-or-nothing affair. It can come in degrees, because both our constructs and our knowledge of the explanatory relation between constructs and data can vary in accuracy and level of detail, and a test can fail to measure all of the features associated with a construct. I conclude by arguing in favor of greater philosophical attention to processes of construct development.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1007/s13194-019-0270-8
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Translate to english
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Thinking, Fast and Slow.Daniel Kahneman - 2011 - New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux.
On the Epistemic Costs of Implicit Bias.Tamar Szabó Gendler - 2011 - Philosophical Studies 156 (1):33-63.

View all 27 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Measurement in Science.Eran Tal - 2015 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Reconsidering the Construct Validity of “Political Knowledge”.Craig M. Burnett - 2016 - Critical Review: A Journal of Politics and Society 28 (3-4):265-286.
Construct Validity in Psychological Tests.Lee J. Cronbach & P. E. Meehl - 1956 - In Herbert Feigl & Michael Scriven (eds.), Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science. , Vol. pp. 1--174.
VIII- What Do We Want From a Model of Implicit Cognition?Jules Holroyd - 2016 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 116 (2):153-179.
Is Construct Validation Valid?Anna Alexandrova & Daniel M. Haybron - 2016 - Philosophy of Science 83 (5):1098-1109.
How Validity Travelled to Economic Experimenting.Floris Heukelom - 2011 - Journal of Economic Methodology 18 (1):13-28.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2020-01-08

Total views
399 ( #22,725 of 2,461,926 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
116 ( #5,379 of 2,461,926 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes