What is it about?
This is an update of a "classic" guide to psychological scale development published by Clark and Watson in this journal in 1995. We provide guidelines for (1) the increased emphasis on hierarchical structural models of personality and psychopathology as well as (2) various types of constructs that don't fit well in these models; and (3) derivative versions such as short forms, translations, and adaptations to various age groups. Finally, we greatly expanded our coverage of the myriad ways to examine validity.
Featured Image
Why is it important?
New scales continue to be developed at a high rate, but many of these measures are poorly constructed, have limited reliability and validity, and contribute little of import to our scientific knowledge. Moreover, many measures are slight variants on existing scales which creates wasteful redundancy. By following the guidelines in both the classic and this updated article, researchers have a greatly increased chance of developing better measures of more distinct constructs that will add meaningfully to the psychological literature.
Perspectives
Over the years, many researchers have commented to us that they consider our classic article to be the "bible" for scale development. If we consider the classic article to be the "Old Testament," the new article is the "New Testament." Together, the two articles provide both the novice and the seasoned scale developer with sound guidance for developing a wide range of psychological measures.
Lee Anna Clark
University of Notre Dame
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: Constructing validity: New developments in creating objective measuring instruments., Psychological Assessment, March 2019, American Psychological Association (APA),
DOI: 10.1037/pas0000626.
You can read the full text:
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
