Lissitz and Samuelsen (2007) propose a new framework for validity theory and terminology, emphasizing a shift in theory and practice toward issues of test content rather than constructs. The author of this article argues that several of Lissitz and Samuelsen's critiques of validity theory focus on previously considered, but subsequently discarded, validity conceptualizations. In addition, she suggests that Lissitz and Samuelsen's conceptualization returns to methods shown historically to be problematic for score use and interpretation. In doing so, she highlights developments in validity theory and practice centering on cognitively based examinations of test scores that have contributed to increased understanding of score meaning and stronger validity arguments.