Mathematization, Not Measurement: A Critique of Stevens’ Scales of Measurement

M. Thomas
{"title":"Mathematization, Not Measurement: A Critique of Stevens’ Scales of Measurement","authors":"M. Thomas","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2412765","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Stevens redefined measurement as “the assignment of numerals to objects and events according to a rule.” Using this definition, he defined four scales of measurement (nominal, ordinal, interval, and ratio) and set out criteria for the appropriate statistical tests to be used with each. Stevens’ paper has been influential in statistics for the social sciences, but it is not grounded in either science or mathematics and confuses measurement with labeling and mathematization. Mathematization using set theory obviates the need for Stevens’ ad hoc framework.","PeriodicalId":90602,"journal":{"name":"Journal of methods and measurement in the social sciences","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of methods and measurement in the social sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2412765","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Stevens redefined measurement as “the assignment of numerals to objects and events according to a rule.” Using this definition, he defined four scales of measurement (nominal, ordinal, interval, and ratio) and set out criteria for the appropriate statistical tests to be used with each. Stevens’ paper has been influential in statistics for the social sciences, but it is not grounded in either science or mathematics and confuses measurement with labeling and mathematization. Mathematization using set theory obviates the need for Stevens’ ad hoc framework.
数学化,而非测量:对史蒂文斯测量量表的批判
史蒂文斯将测量重新定义为“根据规则将数字分配给对象和事件”。利用这一定义,他定义了四种测量尺度(标称、序数、区间和比率),并为每种尺度使用的适当统计测试制定了标准。史蒂文斯的论文在社会科学统计学领域具有影响力,但它既没有科学基础,也没有数学基础,将测量与标记和数学化混为一谈。使用集合论的数学化消除了对Stevens特设框架的需要。
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
审稿时长
26 weeks
×
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