PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “construct validity”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 127 records · Page 7Linked to original sources
PubMed1991

Construct validity evidence for the interpretation of drinking restraint as a response conflict.

A style of control over alcohol consumption, termed restrained drinking, has been identified as an important predictor of drinking behavior and a possible risk factor for more serious alcohol problems. This control style is hypothesized to involve a cyclical pattern of drinking in which the specific phase (restraint or binging) depends on the balance between opposing response tendencies. A survey study of 429 college students supported the important predictions that restrained drinkers experience more response conflict, as evidenced by stronger impulses to drink (cravings and preoccupation with alcohol) as well as stronger inhibitions against drinking (social commitment to drinking goals, self-esteem threat of excessive consumption, and negative expectancies) compared to unrestrained drinkers. Restrained drinkers additionally reported more cyclical and extreme patterns of drinking, more reduction of alcohol consumption below preferred levels, and more costs of drinking reduction compared to unrestrained drinkers. This pattern of results occurred after controlling for habitual levels of alcohol consumption. These findings support important theoretical predictions concerning a restrained drinking style and provide further evidence of its importance in the early identification of the development of alcohol problems.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1976

Kinesthetic aftereffect and personality: a case study of issues involved in construct validation.

Kinesthetic Aftereffect (KAE), once a promising personality index, has been abandoned by many investigators because of poor retest reliability and intermittent validity. In challenging this current consensus, we argue that (a) first-session KAE is valid; (b) poor retest reliability simply reflects later-session bias; (c) hence, multisession studies should not be used to assess validity without taking this bias into account. Those recent studies which failed to support KAE validity were each multisession in design. If our bias contention is correct, these studies should be ignored, and the claim of intermittent validity is thus rebutted. Reanalysis of the most recent major multisession, nonsupportive validity study indicates (a) Session 1 validity, (b) later-session bias, and (c) later-session valdiity when multisession scores are combined to avoid bias. Thus, KAE validly measures personality.

Humans↗
PubMed1985

What's so unhealthy about hostility? Construct validity and psychosocial correlates of the Cook and Medley Ho scale.

The Cook and Medley (1954) Hostility (Ho) scale, a measure of hostility derived from the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI), was recently found in one cross-sectional study to be related to the severity of coronary artery disease and in two prospective studies to predict the development of coronary heart disease. Unfortunately, little information is available to clarify the meaning of the scale, and little is known about the psychosocial characteristics of individuals with high Ho scores. As a result, interpretation of the previous studies is difficult. Our two studies attempted to address these concerns. In Study 1, the Ho scale demonstrated convergent and discriminant validity. Data indicated that the scale primarily assesses suspiciousness, resentment, frequent anger, and cynical distrust of others rather than overtly aggressive behavior or general emotional distress. In Study 2, individuals with high scores displayed comparatively more anger, less hardiness, more frequent and severe hassles, and fewer and less satisfactory social supports. Thus, we propose that the Ho scale assesses cynical hostility and conclude that high scores are associated with a particularly unhealthy psychosocial risk profile. These findings refine our understanding of the Ho scale and assist in the interpretation of previous studies using this measure.

Anger↗