[Uneasiness with facet analysis: time for a reappraisal].

Archiv fur Psychologie Pub Date : 1990-01-01
F Holz-Ebeling
{"title":"[Uneasiness with facet analysis: time for a reappraisal].","authors":"F Holz-Ebeling","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Although already several decades old, the facet analysis (also called facet theory) has not been able to assert itself in the field of psychology. Here the reasons for the widespread uneasiness with the facet analysis will be presented starting with an outline of the approach. This will make it clear that the facet analysis does not represent a research method in the narrower sense and definitely not a \"theory\" but a method with the status of a logical principle of thought. In experimental psychology this principle has been used successfully for a long time in the form of multifactorial experimental designs. However, multifactorial measurement designs are still few and far between in differential and diagnostic psychology. This can be explained especially by the fact that an important aspect of validity--the validity of construct differentiations--has been ignored. Because of a principle rejection of factor analytic methods, even the proponents of the facet analysis have overlooked the central contribution of their approach with respect to the validity of measurement methods.</p>","PeriodicalId":75529,"journal":{"name":"Archiv fur Psychologie","volume":"142 4","pages":"265-93"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1990-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archiv fur Psychologie","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Although already several decades old, the facet analysis (also called facet theory) has not been able to assert itself in the field of psychology. Here the reasons for the widespread uneasiness with the facet analysis will be presented starting with an outline of the approach. This will make it clear that the facet analysis does not represent a research method in the narrower sense and definitely not a "theory" but a method with the status of a logical principle of thought. In experimental psychology this principle has been used successfully for a long time in the form of multifactorial experimental designs. However, multifactorial measurement designs are still few and far between in differential and diagnostic psychology. This can be explained especially by the fact that an important aspect of validity--the validity of construct differentiations--has been ignored. Because of a principle rejection of factor analytic methods, even the proponents of the facet analysis have overlooked the central contribution of their approach with respect to the validity of measurement methods.

[对面分析的不安:是时候重新评估了]。
虽然已经有几十年的历史,但面分析(也称为面理论)还没有能够在心理学领域确立自己的地位。在这里,对面分析普遍感到不安的原因将从该方法的概述开始。这将清楚地表明,面分析不是狭义的研究方法,也绝对不是一种“理论”,而是一种具有逻辑思维原则地位的方法。在实验心理学中,这一原则已经以多因子实验设计的形式成功地应用了很长时间。然而,在鉴别心理学和诊断心理学中,多因素测量设计仍然很少。这可以通过有效性的一个重要方面——构念差异的有效性——被忽视的事实来解释。由于对因素分析方法的原则排斥,即使是面分析的支持者也忽视了他们的方法在测量方法有效性方面的核心贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信