The application of single-item measures has the potential to help applied researchers address conceptual, methodological, and empirical challenges. Based on a large-scale evidence-based approach, we empirically examined the degree to which various constructs in the organizational sciences can be reliably and validly assessed with a single item. In study 4, across 91 selected constructs, 71.4% of the single-item measures demonstrated strong if not very strong definitional correspondence (as a measure of content validity). In study 9, based on a heterogeneous sample of working adults, we demonstrate that the majority of single-item measures examined demonstrated little to no comprehension or usability concerns. Study 15 provides evidence for the reliability of the proposed single-item measures based on test–retest reliabilities across the three temporal conditions (1 day, 2 weeks, 1 month). In study 18, we examined issues of construct and criterion validity using a multi-trait, multi-method approach. Collectively, 75 of the 91 focal measures demonstrated very good or extensive validity, evidencing moderate to high content validity, no usability concerns, moderate to high test–retest reliability, and extensive criterion validity. Finally, in study 24, we empirically examined the argument that only conceptually narrow constructs can be reliably and validly assessed with single-item measures. Results suggest that there is no relationship between subject matter expert evaluations of construct breadth and reliability and validity evidence collected across the first four studies. Beyond providing an off-the-shelf compendium of validated single-item measures, we abstract our validation steps providing a roadmap to replicate and build upon. Limitations and future directions are discussed.

单项测量的应用有可能帮助应用研究人员解决概念、方法和经验方面的挑战。基于大规模的基于证据的方法，我们凭经验检验了组织科学中的各种结构在多大程度上可以通过单个项目进行可靠和有效的评估。在研究 4 中，在 91 个选定的结构中，71.4% 的单项测量表现出即使不是非常强也很强定义对应（作为内容有效性的衡量标准）。在研究 9 中，基于在职成年人的异质样本，我们证明所检查的大多数单项测量几乎没有或没有任何理解或可用性问题。研究 15 根据三种时间条件（1 天、2 周、1 个月）的重测信度，为所提议的单项测量的信度提供了证据。在研究 18 中，我们使用多特征、多方法的方法检查了结构和标准有效性问题。总的来说，91 项重点措施中有 75 项表现出非常好的或广泛的效度，证明内容效度中等到高，没有可用性问题，重测信度中等到高，以及广泛的标准效度。最后，在研究 24 中，我们凭经验检验了这样一个论点，即只有概念上狭窄的结构才能通过单项测量进行可靠和有效的评估。结果表明，主题专家对构建广度的评估与前四项研究收集的信度和效度证据之间没有关系。除了提供经过验证的单项测量的现成概要外，我们还抽象了验证步骤，提供了可复制和构建的路线图。讨论了限制和未来的方向。