Construct Validity and the Validity of Replication Studies: A Systematic Review

Currently, there is little guidance for navigating measurement challenges that threaten construct validity in replication research. To identify common challenges and ultimately strengthen replication research, we conducted a systematic review of the measures used in the 100 original and replication studies from the Reproducibility Project: Psychology (Open Science Collaboration, 2015). Results indicate that it was common for scales used in the original studies to have little or no validity evidence. Our systematic review demonstrates and corroborates evidence that issues of construct validity are sorely neglected in original and replicated research. We identify four measurement challenges replicators are likely to face: a lack of essential measurement information, a lack of validity evidence, measurement differences, and translation. Next, we offer solutions for addressing these challenges that will improve measurement practices in original and replication research. Finally, we close with a discussion of the need to develop measurement methodologies for the next generation of replication research.

Automated summary

This study highlights the lack of guidance in addressing measurement challenges that threaten construct validity in replication research. By conducting a systematic review of measures used in original and replication studies, it revealed that scales used in original studies often lacked validity evidence. The research identifies four common measurement challenges for replicators and provides solutions to improve measurement practices.