DIRECTIONS: READ TE FOLLOWING DISCUSSION AND RESPOND TO LEARNER. CITE REFERENCES APA STYLE
Validity can be defined as an evaluative judgment based on a variety of considerations, such as the structure of the measurement operations, the pattern of correlations, and the results of the numbers that represent the magnitudes of the intended attributes (Guion, 1980).
Construct validity makes up the basis for the Unitarian doctrine of validity whereas a Trinitarian doctrine of validity consists of Content validity, as well as criterion-related validity and construct validity (Guion, 1980).
Construct validity measures validity by judging the subjects, topics, and content within the test (Cohen, Swerlik, and Sturman, 2012). Of course all three categories are included in the concept of Unitarian validity, but from more of an overview.
Trinitarian validity gives each category its own measure. Specificially, the criterion-related validity evaluates the scores on a test in comparison to other test scores and measures (Cohen, Swerlik, and Sturman, 2012). Construct validity uses a comprehensive analysis of test scores to better understand what the test is aiming to measure.
I conclude that the Trinitarian doctrine of validity is more thorough and give a better overall analysis of a test's true validity by incorporating all three categories rather than just the construct validity alone. However, the content of the test and the purpose of the test plays a large role in the extent of a thorough analysis is needed.
References
Cohen, Ronald J., Mark Swerdlik, Edward Sturman. Psychological Testing and Assessment: An Introduction to Tests and Measurement, 8th Edition. McGraw-Hill Learning Solutions, 07/2012. VitalBook file.
Guion, R. M. (1980). On Trinitarian doctrines of validity. Professional Psychology, 11(3), 385-398. doi:10.1037/0735-7028.11.3.385
Messick, S. (1995). Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from persons' responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. American Psychologist, 50(9), 741-749. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.50.9.741