In his article, Paul E. Newton has conducted a review of selected perspectives on validity theory with the goal of disambiguating the definition of validity and describing a consensus definition of validity. Newton provides a nuanced discussion of the evolution of the concept of validity over the years. His Focus article has two major goals: (1)…

What is validity? A simple question but apparently one with many answers, as Paul Newton highlights in his review of the history of validity. The current definition of validity, as entertained in the 1999 "Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing" is indeed a consensus, one between the classical notion of attributes, and measures…

This focus article provided the author with an opportunity to unpack the consensus definition of validity and to explore its implications in the light of recent debates. He proposed an elaboration of the consensus definition, which was intended to express the spirit of the "Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing" with increased…

Paul E. Newton argues in favor of a conception of validity, viz, "the consensus definition of validity," according to which the extension of the predicate "is valid" is a subset of "assessment-based decision-making procedure[s], which [are] underwritten by an argument that the assessment procedure can be used to measure the attribute entailed by…

Presents a reprint of an article proposing professional preparation guidelines which first appeared in the October 1983 "Measurement and Evaluation in Guidance." Seven response articles offer additional perspectives on the proposed standards. (JAC)

This article focuses on two key themes in the four featured reviews on evidence-based assessment. The first theme is the essential role of theory in psychological assessment. An overview of this complex, multilayered role is presented. The second theme is the need for a common metric with which to gauge the utility of specific psychological tests…

Two nested structural models are developed to determine whether test-session behaviors affect the manner in which intelligence is measured or influence the constructs being measured. Results indicate that test-session behaviors play a larger role influencing the mechanisms of measurement than on the constructs of intelligence. (Author/EMK)