Cognitive Tests, Constructs, and Content Validity: A commentary on Schmidt ()

Abstract

This commentary discusses a number of issues that build on Schmidt's (International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 20, 1-13 (2012)) perspective on content validity and cognitive tests. First, it elaborates on the relationship between the treatment of content validity in various professional standards and government guidelines. Second, it offers a differing perspective on the definition of 'construct' than that taken by Schmidt.Third, it elaborates on the settings in which content validity can and cannot be used to support the use of a given test in the cognitive ability domain.

Assessment, Measurement, and Prediction for Personnel Decisions, 2nd Edition by Robert M. Guion

“…Schmidt (2012a, 2012b) argues that cognitive skills used in content valid tests need not be considered as constructs. Kehoe (2012) agrees with Schmidt's position, whereas Ployhart (2012) and Sackett (2012) argue that such cognitive skills should be viewed as constructs. Given Dr. Guion's treatment of the term “construct” in this book, I believe he would side with Ployhart and Sackett in this debate.…”

The Progress Principle: Using Small Wins to Ignite Joy, Engagement, and Creativity at Work by Teresa Amabile and Steven Kramer

“…Schmidt (2012aSchmidt ( , 2012b argues that cognitive skills used in content valid tests need not be considered as constructs. Kehoe (2012) agrees with Schmidt's position, whereas Ployhart (2012) and Sackett (2012) argue that such cognitive skills should be viewed as constructs. Given Dr. Guion's treatment of the term "construct" in this book, I believe he would side with Ployhart and Sackett in this debate.…”

Content Validity and Cognitive Tests: Response to Kehoe (), Ployhart (), and Sackett ()

“…T he comments by Kehoe (2012), Ployhart (2012), and Sackett (2012) are thoughtful and insightful, and I appreciate both their quality and the effort that went into producing them.The big picture in these comments is the fact that all three authors agree that from both a scientific and a professional point of view, cognitive measures can have content validity. This is important because all three commentators are highly respected in the field of industrial-organizational (I/O) psychology and have made important contribution to the field.This consensus will go a long way toward establishing a more uniform position on this question in I/O psychology and beyond.…”

“…The comments by Kehoe (), Ployhart (), and Sackett () are thoughtful and insightful, and I appreciate both their quality and the effort that went into producing them. The big picture in these comments is the fact that all three authors agree that from both a scientific and a professional point of view, cognitive measures can have content validity.…”