{"title":"心理测量实践中的一个特点。","authors":"Mark White","doi":"10.1037/met0000731","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This essay discusses a peculiarity in institutionalized psychological measurement practices. Namely, an inherent contradiction between guidelines for how scales/tests are developed and how those scales/tests are typically analyzed. Best practices for developing scales/tests emphasize developing individual items or subsets of items to capture unique aspects of constructs, such that the full construct is captured across the test. Analysis approaches, typically factor analysis or related reflective models, assume that no individual item (nor a subset of items) captures unique, construct-relevant variance. This contradiction has important implications for the use of factor analysis to support measurement claims. The implications and other critiques of factor analysis are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":20782,"journal":{"name":"Psychological methods","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A peculiarity in psychological measurement practices.\",\"authors\":\"Mark White\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/met0000731\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This essay discusses a peculiarity in institutionalized psychological measurement practices. Namely, an inherent contradiction between guidelines for how scales/tests are developed and how those scales/tests are typically analyzed. Best practices for developing scales/tests emphasize developing individual items or subsets of items to capture unique aspects of constructs, such that the full construct is captured across the test. Analysis approaches, typically factor analysis or related reflective models, assume that no individual item (nor a subset of items) captures unique, construct-relevant variance. This contradiction has important implications for the use of factor analysis to support measurement claims. The implications and other critiques of factor analysis are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20782,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychological methods\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychological methods\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000731\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological methods","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000731","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
本文讨论了制度化心理测量实践的一个特点。也就是说，如何开发尺度/测试的指导方针与如何典型地分析这些尺度/测试之间存在固有的矛盾。开发规模/测试的最佳实践强调开发单个项目或项目子集，以捕获构造的独特方面，从而在整个测试中捕获完整的构造。分析方法，通常是因素分析或相关的反射模型，假设没有单独的项目（或项目的子集）捕获唯一的、与结构相关的方差。这一矛盾对使用因子分析来支持测量要求具有重要意义。讨论了因子分析的含义和其他批评。（PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA，版权所有）。
A peculiarity in psychological measurement practices.
This essay discusses a peculiarity in institutionalized psychological measurement practices. Namely, an inherent contradiction between guidelines for how scales/tests are developed and how those scales/tests are typically analyzed. Best practices for developing scales/tests emphasize developing individual items or subsets of items to capture unique aspects of constructs, such that the full construct is captured across the test. Analysis approaches, typically factor analysis or related reflective models, assume that no individual item (nor a subset of items) captures unique, construct-relevant variance. This contradiction has important implications for the use of factor analysis to support measurement claims. The implications and other critiques of factor analysis are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).
期刊介绍：
Psychological Methods is devoted to the development and dissemination of methods for collecting, analyzing, understanding, and interpreting psychological data. Its purpose is the dissemination of innovations in research design, measurement, methodology, and quantitative and qualitative analysis to the psychological community; its further purpose is to promote effective communication about related substantive and methodological issues. The audience is expected to be diverse and to include those who develop new procedures, those who are responsible for undergraduate and graduate training in design, measurement, and statistics, as well as those who employ those procedures in research.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
