This study followed up on previous work that examined the incidence of reporting evidence based on test consequences in Mental Measurements Yearbook. In the present study, additional possible outlets for what has been called ‘‘consequential validity’’ evidence were investigated, including all articles published in the past 10 years in several applied journals devoted to educational assessment and educational policy, and all presentations at recent annual meetings for the three organizations that sponsor the Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing (American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, and National Council on Measurement in Education). Consistent with previous findings, consequences of testing as a source of validity evidence is essentially nonexistent in the professional literature and applied measurement and policy work. The article concludes with implications of these findings for extending and refining current validity theory and validation practice.

No abstract