{"title":"基于论证的有效性方法:编制活文件并纳入预注册内容","authors":"Daria Gerasimova","doi":"10.1111/jedm.12385","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"I propose two practical advances to the argument‐based approach to validity: developing a living document and incorporating preregistration. First, I present a potential structure for the living document that includes an up‐to‐date summary of the validity argument. As the validation process may span across multiple studies, the living document allows future users of the instrument to access the entire validity argument in one place. Second, I describe how preregistration can be incorporated in the argument‐based approach. Specifically, I distinguish between two types of preregistration: preregistration of the argument and preregistration of validation studies. Preregistration of the argument is a single preregistration that is specified for the entire validation process. Here, the developer specifies interpretations, uses, and claims before collecting validity evidence. Preregistration of a validation study refers to preregistering a single validation study that aims to evaluate a set of claims. Here, the developer describes study components (e.g., research design, data collection, data analysis, etc.), before collecting data. Both preregistration types have the potential to reduce the risk of bias (e.g., hindsight and confirmation biases), as well as to allow others to evaluate the risk of bias and, hence, calibrate confidence, in the developer's evaluation of the validity argument.","PeriodicalId":47871,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Educational Measurement","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Argument‐Based Approach to Validity: Developing a Living Document and Incorporating Preregistration\",\"authors\":\"Daria Gerasimova\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jedm.12385\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"I propose two practical advances to the argument‐based approach to validity: developing a living document and incorporating preregistration. First, I present a potential structure for the living document that includes an up‐to‐date summary of the validity argument. As the validation process may span across multiple studies, the living document allows future users of the instrument to access the entire validity argument in one place. Second, I describe how preregistration can be incorporated in the argument‐based approach. Specifically, I distinguish between two types of preregistration: preregistration of the argument and preregistration of validation studies. Preregistration of the argument is a single preregistration that is specified for the entire validation process. Here, the developer specifies interpretations, uses, and claims before collecting validity evidence. Preregistration of a validation study refers to preregistering a single validation study that aims to evaluate a set of claims. Here, the developer describes study components (e.g., research design, data collection, data analysis, etc.), before collecting data. Both preregistration types have the potential to reduce the risk of bias (e.g., hindsight and confirmation biases), as well as to allow others to evaluate the risk of bias and, hence, calibrate confidence, in the developer's evaluation of the validity argument.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47871,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Educational Measurement\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Educational Measurement\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/jedm.12385\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Educational Measurement","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jedm.12385","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}
Argument‐Based Approach to Validity: Developing a Living Document and Incorporating Preregistration
I propose two practical advances to the argument‐based approach to validity: developing a living document and incorporating preregistration. First, I present a potential structure for the living document that includes an up‐to‐date summary of the validity argument. As the validation process may span across multiple studies, the living document allows future users of the instrument to access the entire validity argument in one place. Second, I describe how preregistration can be incorporated in the argument‐based approach. Specifically, I distinguish between two types of preregistration: preregistration of the argument and preregistration of validation studies. Preregistration of the argument is a single preregistration that is specified for the entire validation process. Here, the developer specifies interpretations, uses, and claims before collecting validity evidence. Preregistration of a validation study refers to preregistering a single validation study that aims to evaluate a set of claims. Here, the developer describes study components (e.g., research design, data collection, data analysis, etc.), before collecting data. Both preregistration types have the potential to reduce the risk of bias (e.g., hindsight and confirmation biases), as well as to allow others to evaluate the risk of bias and, hence, calibrate confidence, in the developer's evaluation of the validity argument.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Educational Measurement (JEM) publishes original measurement research, provides reviews of measurement publications, and reports on innovative measurement applications. The topics addressed will interest those concerned with the practice of measurement in field settings, as well as be of interest to measurement theorists. In addition to presenting new contributions to measurement theory and practice, JEM also serves as a vehicle for improving educational measurement applications in a variety of settings.