Yes, intelligence is an example of a construct defined by a nomological network. IQ tests are the best operationalization we have, but there are multiple different tests, and no one who knows the literature would say that a high score on an IQ test is what intelligence *is*, so it is not a criterion measure. Technically speaking since intelligence does not have a criterion measure it is not evaluated in terms of criterion validity (concurrent/predictive validity). It has predictive *utility*, in that it is very useful to know to predict certain outcomes, but different constructs can be more or less useful in the real world while still having construct validity. We judge intelligence based on the fact that multiple different measures converge to it, and it is orthogonal to different concepts like neuroticism and conscientiousness. See here (or the original 1955 paper) for more on predictive validity: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predictive_validity?useskin=vector
Yes, intelligence is an example of a construct defined by a nomological network. IQ tests are the best operationalization we have, but there are multiple different tests, and no one who knows the literature would say that a high score on an IQ test is what intelligence *is*, so it is not a criterion measure. Technically speaking since intelligence does not have a criterion measure it is not evaluated in terms of criterion validity (concurrent/predictive validity). It has predictive *utility*, in that it is very useful to know to predict certain outcomes, but different constructs can be more or less useful in the real world while still having construct validity. We judge intelligence based on the fact that multiple different measures converge to it, and it is orthogonal to different concepts like neuroticism and conscientiousness. See here (or the original 1955 paper) for more on predictive validity: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predictive_validity?useskin=vector