Eurokd
European KnowledgeDevelopment Institute
Language Teaching Research Quarterly

e‐ISSN

    

2667-6753

CiteScore

  exclamation mark

1.2

ICV

  exclamation mark

124.94

SNIP

  exclamation mark

0.604

SJR

  exclamation mark

0.283

CiteScore

  exclamation mark

1.2

ICV

  exclamation mark

124.94

SNIP

  exclamation mark

0.604

SJR

  exclamation mark

0.283

SCOPUSEBSCOProQuestCrossrefIndex CopernicusMIAR

Systematic Review

How Many Language Testing Publications Use “the Unqualified Phrase ‘the Validity of the Test’”?

Language Teaching Research Quarterly, Volume 51, Pages 273-283, https://doi.org/10.32038/ltrq.2025.51.05

The Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing (AERA et al., 2014) states that “It is incorrect to use the unqualified phrase ‘the validity of the test’” (p. 11). Although the Standards clearly states that it is incorrect to use the phrase “validity of the test” because “it is the interpretations of test scores for proposed uses that are evaluated, not the test itself” (p. 11), many authors still use this terminology. This study examines how frequently this occurs, why this may occur, and how to interpret this phenomenon. First, examination of articles published in Language Testing and Language Assessment Quarterly between 2011–2022 resulted in 233 articles being identified as including the expression “validity of + test” at least once. Next, the context around the occurrences of “use(s)” and “interpretation(s)” within these articles was analyzed to determine whether the author(s) referred to test interpretation and use. This was interpreted as evidence that the authors were familiar with the Standards’ definition of validity, even though they used language that contradicted the Standards’ guidelines. This study sheds light on the extent to which authors adhere to the Standards’ guidelines and potential factors contributing to deviations from the recommended terminology.

Loading PDF…
next

Page 1 of

next

Download Count : 61

Visit Count : 170

Publisher’s Note

The claims, arguments, and counter-arguments made in this article are exclusively those of the contributing authors. Hence, they do not necessarily represent the viewpoints of the authors’ affiliated institutions, or EUROKD as the publisher, the editors and the reviewers of the article.

 

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

 

Funding

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

 

CRediT Authorship Contribution Statement

Haeun Kim: Conceptualization, Methodology, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Data Curation, Writing - Original Draft, Project Administration

Shireen Baghestani: Conceptualization, Methodology, Validation, Writing - Review & Editing, Visualization

 

Generative AI Use Disclosure Statement

The authors did not use any AI tools in this manuscript.

 

Ethics Declarations

World Medical Association (WMA) Declaration of Helsinki–Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Participants

Not applicable.

 

Competing Interests

The authors have no competing interests,

 

Data Availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.