Points of contention in measure evaluation can arise from the use of divergent validity frameworks: A reply to Conway et al. (2025).

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Psychological Assessment
Published
2025-02-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0001361
Primary Topic
Evaluation and Performance Assessment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Points of contention in measure evaluation can arise from the use of divergent validity frameworks: A reply to Conway et al. (2025).

Leon Patrick Wendt
Psychological Assessment
Evaluation and Performance Assessment
article

Points of contention in measure evaluation can arise from the use of divergent validity frameworks: A reply to Conway et al. (2025).

Leon Patrick Wendt
article en

Abstract

No abstract available for this paper.
Psychological AssessmentVol. 37(3)
University of Kassel (DE)
Openalex Percentile: Top 97%
Evaluation and Performance Assessment
DOISourceOpenAlex
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Points of contention in measure evaluation can arise from the use of divergent validity frameworks: A reply to Conway et al. (2025). — Leon Patrick Wendt · Psychological Assessment (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS