Improving construct validity: Cronbach, Meehl, and Neurath's ship

Psychological Assessment

Volumn 17, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 409-412

  Westen, Drew ^a   Rosenthal, Robert ^b,c,d  

^a EMORY UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c HARVARD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d HARVARD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Assessment; Construct validity; Fit indices; Multitrait multimethod matrix; Personality

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY; COGNITION; CONSTRUCT VALIDITY; DEPRESSION; DIAGNOSTIC AND STATISTICAL MANUAL OF MENTAL DISORDERS; HUMAN; HYPOTHESIS; MEASUREMENT; METHODOLOGY; MOTIVATION; NEUROSIS; PERSONALITY; PERSONALITY DISORDER; SCORING SYSTEM; VALIDATION PROCESS; WORKING MEMORY;

HUMANS; PERSONALITY ASSESSMENT; PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTS; PSYCHOMETRICS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

EID: 30744474229     PISSN: 10403590     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/1040-3590.17.4.409     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
2. Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56, 81-105.
3. Clifton, A., Turkheimer, E., & Oltmanns, T. F. (2005). Self- and peer perspectives on pathological personality traits and interpersonal problems. Psychological Assessment, 17, 123-131.
4. Coleman, M. J., Levy, D. L., Lenzenweger, M. F., & Holzman, P. S. (1996). Thought disorder, perceptual aberrations, and schizotypy. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 105, 469-473.
5. Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52, 281-302.
6. Exner, J. E., Jr. (2003). The Rorschach: A comprehensive system (4th ed.). New York: Wiley.
7. Fiedler, E., Oltmanns, T., & Turkheimer, E. (2004). Traits associated with personality disorders and adjustment to military life: Predictive validity of self and peer reports. Military Medicine, 169, 32-40.
8. Grove, W. M., Zald, D. H., Lebow, B. S., Snitz, B. E., & Nelson, C. (2000). Clinical versus mechanical prediction: A meta-analysis. Psychological Assessment, 12, 19-30.
9. Hiller, J. B., Rosenthal, R., Bornstein, R. F., Berry, D. T. R., & Brunell-Neuleib, S. (1999). A comparative meta-analysis of Rorschach and MMPI validity. Psychological Assessment, 11, 278-296.
10. Klonsky, E. D., Oltmanns, T. F., & Turkheimer, E. (2002). Informant-reports of personality disorder: Relation to self-reports and future research directions. Clinical Psychology: Science & Practice, 9, 300-311.
11. Kuhn, T. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
12. Meehl, P. E. (1954). Clinical vs. statistical prediction. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
13. Neurath, O. (1921). Antispengler (T. Parzen, Trans.). Munich, Germany: Callwey.
14. Tomarken, A. J., & Waller, N. G. (2003). Potential problems with "well fitting" models. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 112, 578-598.
15. Wampold, B. E. (2001). The great psychotherapy debate: Models, methods, and findings. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
16. Westen, D., Feit, A., & Zittel, C. (1999). Methodological issues in research using projective techniques. In P. C. Kendall, J. N. Butcher & G. Holmbeck (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in clinical psychology (2nd ed., pp. 224-240). New York: Wiley.
17. Westen, D., & Weinberger, J. (2004). When clinical description becomes statistical prediction. American Psychologist, 59, 595-613.