Limitations of the Sum-and-Alpha Approach to Measurement in Behavioral Research

IF 3.4 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Daniel M. McNeish
{"title":"Limitations of the Sum-and-Alpha Approach to Measurement in Behavioral Research","authors":"Daniel M. McNeish","doi":"10.1177/23727322221117144","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Many behavioral researchers are interested in measuring constructs such as mood, affect, or cognition—all of which cannot be observed directly. Instead, researchers administer items from surveys, tests, or scales to indirectly measure aspects of the construct. Psychometrics is a branch of statistics dedicated to determining whether scores created from item responses are reasonably capturing the intended construct. However, several review papers have shown that behavioral research frequently does not engage with psychometrics and instead creates scores by assigning numerical values to item responses, summing item responses, and reporting reliability of summed scores without any assessment of whether scores are valid. Despite the popularity of this approach, it can limit the informativeness and generalizability of conclusions in behavioral research. The goal of this paper is to raise awareness of these issues with policymakers and other consumers of research and to encourage producers of research to consider readily available, more rigorous approaches.","PeriodicalId":52185,"journal":{"name":"Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences","volume":"9 1","pages":"196 - 203"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23727322221117144","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Many behavioral researchers are interested in measuring constructs such as mood, affect, or cognition—all of which cannot be observed directly. Instead, researchers administer items from surveys, tests, or scales to indirectly measure aspects of the construct. Psychometrics is a branch of statistics dedicated to determining whether scores created from item responses are reasonably capturing the intended construct. However, several review papers have shown that behavioral research frequently does not engage with psychometrics and instead creates scores by assigning numerical values to item responses, summing item responses, and reporting reliability of summed scores without any assessment of whether scores are valid. Despite the popularity of this approach, it can limit the informativeness and generalizability of conclusions in behavioral research. The goal of this paper is to raise awareness of these issues with policymakers and other consumers of research and to encourage producers of research to consider readily available, more rigorous approaches.
行为研究中Sum和Alpha测量方法的局限性
许多行为研究人员对测量情绪、情感或认知等结构感兴趣——所有这些都无法直接观察到。相反,研究人员管理调查、测试或量表中的项目,以间接测量结构的各个方面。心理测量学是统计学的一个分支,专门用于确定根据项目反应创建的分数是否合理地反映了预期结构。然而,几篇综述论文表明,行为研究通常不涉及心理测量学,而是通过为项目反应分配数值、对项目反应求和以及报告求和分数的可靠性来创建分数,而不评估分数是否有效。尽管这种方法很受欢迎,但它会限制行为研究中结论的信息性和可推广性。本文的目标是提高决策者和其他研究消费者对这些问题的认识,并鼓励研究生产者考虑现成的、更严格的方法。
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
Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences
Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences Social Sciences-Public Administration
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
24
×
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