Jump to content

Nomological network

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Qwerfjkl (talk | contribs) at 21:14, 5 July 2021 (Removed 'a(n)' from the beginning of the short description per WP:SDFORMAT, from a request at Wikipedia:Reward board. (via WP:JWB)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

A nomological network (or nomological net[1]) is a representation of the concepts (constructs) of interest in a study, their observable manifestations, and the interrelationships between these. The term "nomological" derives from the Greek, meaning "lawful", or in philosophy of science terms, "law-like". It was Cronbach and Meehl's view of construct validity that in order to provide evidence that a measure has construct validity, a nomological network must be developed for its measure. [2]

The necessary elements of a nomological network are:

Validity evidence based on nomological validity is a general form of construct validity. It is the degree to which a construct behaves as it should within a system of related constructs (the nomological network).[3]

Nomological networks are used in theory development and use a modernist[clarification needed] approach.[4]

See also

References

  1. ^ Preckel, Franzis; Brunner, Martin (2017), "Nomological Nets", in Zeigler-Hill, Virgil; Shackelford, Todd K. (eds.), Encyclopedia of Personality and Individual Differences, Springer International Publishing, pp. 1–4, doi:10.1007/978-3-319-28099-8_1334-1, ISBN 9783319280998
  2. ^ Cronbach, L.J.; Meehl, P.E. (1955). "Construct validity in psychological tests". Psychological Bulletin. 52 (4): 281–302. doi:10.1037/h0040957. hdl:11299/184279. PMID 13245896.
  3. ^ Liu, Liping; Li, Chan; Zhu, Dan (2012). "A New Approach to Testing Nomological Validity and Its Application to a Second-Order Measurement Model of Trust". Journal of the Association for Information Systems. 13 (12): 950–975. doi:10.17705/1jais.00320.
  4. ^ Alavi, M, Archibald, M., McMaster, R. Lopez, V. and Cleary, M. (2018) Aligning theory and methodology in mixed methods Research: Before Design Theoretical Placement International Journal of Social Research Methodology 21:5, 527-540