Despite agreement about the central importance of validity for educational and psychological testing, consensus regarding the definition of validity remains elusive. Differences in the definition of validity are examined and reveals that a potential cause of disagreement stems from differences in word use and meanings given to key terms commonly employed when discussing validity. A proposal for the meaning and use of specific terms is offered and a framework that divides issues associated with validity is presented. Specifically, the framework divides what Messick termed “an integrated evaluative judgment” into three components: Instrument Validity, Verification of Interpretation and Decision, and Utility of Actions.

中文翻译：

---

澄清有效性的术语和验证的调查阶段

尽管就有效性对教育和心理测试的核心重要性达成一致，但关于有效性定义的共识仍然难以捉摸。对有效性定义的差异进行了研究，并揭示了分歧的潜在原因源于在讨论有效性时常用的关键术语的用词和含义的差异。提出了有关特定术语的含义和使用的建议，并提出了一个划分与有效性相关的问题的框架。具体来说，该框架将梅西克所谓的“综合评价判断”分为三个部分：工具有效性、解释和决策的验证以及行动的效用。