Response to Response

Abstract

We challenge the view that “one is better than none” on grounds that single-item assessments perpetuate a simplistic view of well-being, which is out of touch with how the field has progressed over recent decades. We also question blanket advocacy for measures in the absence of substantive scientific questions that require thoughtful engagement with the prior literature to make sound measurement choices. Substantive illustrations, invoking research on well-being and health in different cultural and socioeconomic contexts, are provided. Quality control is also essential in making sound measurement choices. Numerous contenders fail at this juncture because they have no conceptual foundation and also lack rigorous psychometric analyses documenting their empirical credibility. Another critical element in adjudicating measurement quality is extent of prior usage: evidence that the measures have taken hold in the scientific community, indicated by citation counts and number of published studies. We conclude that all such quality control criteria were inadequately addressed or missing in the measurement recommendations put forth in Chapter 17.