Researchers propose ‘measurement validity induction’ as a concept describing a risk in scale use

Researchers have proposed a new concept aimed at a problem in measurement: using validity evidence from one context to justify the use of a scale in a different one. Writing in BMC Medical Research Methodology, César Merino-Soto and colleagues introduce the term “measurement validity induction” as a conceptual tool for describing the omission or inappropriate application of validity results obtained in one context when researchers use and interpret the same measures in different contexts.

The core of the problem, according to the authors, is that validity is not a fixed property of a questionnaire or scale. A measure that has been shown to work well in one population, setting or purpose may not carry that evidence with it when it is applied elsewhere. Measurement validity induction captures the risk of using irrelevant information to justify the use or interpretation of a measure — in effect, advocating for validity where it may not exist.

The paper arises from what the authors describe as a growing importance of psychometric properties in applied and basic research in the social sciences, particularly in psychology. Widespread access to validation procedures and their increasing dissemination worldwide have made validated measures more available than ever, yet the availability and use of these measures may be problematic for researchers who rely on evidence gathered under different conditions.

To ground the concept in real research practice, the authors analyzed several examples from the published literature on scale validations. These examples were drawn from three applied areas: clinical practice, occupational health, and user satisfaction. By examining how validity results from earlier studies were cited or reused in new contexts, the analysis illustrates how measurement validity induction can appear in published work.

The practical implication of the paper is a call for more transparent reporting. The authors argue for the need to report minimum parameters of the validity of a measure in a new context, beyond those reported in test manuals or previous studies. In other words, evidence summarized in a manual or in an earlier validation study should not stand in for evidence gathered in the setting where the measure is actually being used.

The concept is presented as a conceptual tool rather than a new statistical method, and the paper’s conclusions rest on the analyzed examples from the validation literature rather than on new empirical data collection.

Subject of Research: Measurement validity induction as a conceptual tool for assessing scale validity across contexts

Article Title: Measurement validity induction: a issues in the assessment, and measuring constructs through scales and instruments

Article References: Merino-Soto, C., Juárez-García, A., García-Rivas, J., Livia-Segovia, J., & Toledano-Toledano, F. (2026). Measurement validity induction: a issues in the assessment, and measuring constructs through scales and instruments. BMC Medical Research Methodology. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-026-03045-2

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1186/s12874-026-03045-2

Keywords: psychometrics, measurement validity, scale validation, research methodology, social sciences, psychology, clinical practice, occupational health, user satisfaction, BMC Medical Research Methodology, Measurement, validity