Our field acknowledged the importance of discriminant validity since Campbell and Fiske’s (1959) multitrait-multimethod matrices (MTMM), and yet, the presence of construct proliferation serves as evidence of the lack of clarity or insufficiency of current practices for justifying discriminant validity inferences. This paper seeks to improve our measurement sciences and combat construct proliferation by providing better empirical guidelines for supporting discriminant validity of constructs. We present how researchers are typically supporting the discriminant validity of constructs through a systematic literature review of 849 articles from five top journals in organizational science. Additionally, using results from 325,000 iterations of a Monte Carlo simulation, we demonstrate the questionable efficacy of a specific and dominant methodological approach, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), in identifying unitary constructs. We compare these results to existing recommended practices and seek expert opinions from the Organizational Research Methods (ORM) editorial board on the specific practices that researchers should be engaging in to test discriminant validity inferences. Finally, using this data, we provide a set of recommendations for researchers when evaluating the distinctiveness of their measures to mitigate the issue of construct proliferation moving forward.