IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/soinre/v45y1998i1p233-251.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Should Classical Test Theory Have Defined Validity?

Author

Listed:
  • Donald Zimmerman

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Donald Zimmerman, 1998. "How Should Classical Test Theory Have Defined Validity?," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 45(1), pages 233-251, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:soinre:v:45:y:1998:i:1:p:233-251
    DOI: 10.1023/A:1006949915525
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1023/A:1006949915525
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1023/A:1006949915525?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Louis Guttman, 1953. "Reliability formulas that do not assume experimental independence," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 18(3), pages 225-239, September.
    2. Donald Zimmerman, 1975. "Probability spaces, hilbert spaces, and the axioms of test theory," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 40(3), pages 395-412, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Christmann, Andreas & Aelst, Stefan van, 2002. "Robust estimation of Cronbach's alpha," Technical Reports 2002,42, Technische Universität Dortmund, Sonderforschungsbereich 475: Komplexitätsreduktion in multivariaten Datenstrukturen.
    2. Dehghani, Milad & William Kennedy, Ryan & Mashatan, Atefeh & Rese, Alexandra & Karavidas, Dionysios, 2022. "High interest, low adoption. A mixed-method investigation into the factors influencing organisational adoption of blockchain technology," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 393-411.
    3. Tenko Raykov, 2001. "On the Use and Utility of the Reliability Coefficient in Social and Behavioral Research," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 35(3), pages 253-263, August.
    4. Michael Eid, 2000. "A multitrait-multimethod model with minimal assumptions," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 65(2), pages 241-261, June.
    5. Rolf Steyer & Manfred Schmitt, 1990. "Latent state-trait models in attitude research," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 427-445, November.
    6. Edward Kroc, 2020. "Measurement protocols, random-variable-valued measurements, and response process error: Estimation and inference when sample data are not deterministic," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(10), pages 1-25, October.
    7. Christmann, A. & Van Aelst, S., 2006. "Robust estimation of Cronbach's alpha," Journal of Multivariate Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 97(7), pages 1660-1674, August.
    8. Donald W. Zimmerman, 2011. "Sampling Variability and Axioms of Classical Test Theory," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 36(5), pages 586-615, October.
    9. Louis Guttman, 1955. "Reliability formulas for noncompleted or speeded tests," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 20(2), pages 113-124, June.
    10. Roman Fiala & Martin Prokop, 2013. "The relationship among reputation, inter-organizational trust and alliance performance," Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, Mendel University Press, vol. 61(4), pages 899-908.
    11. Tobias Koch & Martin Schultze & Jana Holtmann & Christian Geiser & Michael Eid, 2017. "A Multimethod Latent State-Trait Model for Structurally Different And Interchangeable Methods," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 82(1), pages 17-47, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:soinre:v:45:y:1998:i:1:p:233-251. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.