重新审视量表类型:一些误解、误解和建议

Psych Pub Date : 2023-04-04 DOI:10.3390/psych5020018
L. Feuerstahler
{"title":"重新审视量表类型:一些误解、误解和建议","authors":"L. Feuerstahler","doi":"10.3390/psych5020018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Stevens’s classification of scales into nominal, ordinal, interval, and ratio types is among the most controversial yet resilient ideas in psychological and educational measurement. In this essay, I challenge the notion that scale type is essential for the development of measures in these fields. I highlight how the concept of scale type, and of interval-level measurement in particular, is variously interpreted by many researchers. These (often unstated) differences in perspectives lead to confusion about what evidence is appropriate to demonstrate interval-level measurement, as well as the implications of scale type for research in practice. I then borrow from contemporary ideas in the philosophy of measurement to demonstrate that scale type can only be established in the context of well-developed theory and through experimentation. I conclude that current notions of scale type are of limited use, and that scale type ought to occupy a lesser role in psychometric discourse and pedagogy.","PeriodicalId":93139,"journal":{"name":"Psych","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Scale Type Revisited: Some Misconceptions, Misinterpretations, and Recommendations\",\"authors\":\"L. Feuerstahler\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/psych5020018\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Stevens’s classification of scales into nominal, ordinal, interval, and ratio types is among the most controversial yet resilient ideas in psychological and educational measurement. In this essay, I challenge the notion that scale type is essential for the development of measures in these fields. I highlight how the concept of scale type, and of interval-level measurement in particular, is variously interpreted by many researchers. These (often unstated) differences in perspectives lead to confusion about what evidence is appropriate to demonstrate interval-level measurement, as well as the implications of scale type for research in practice. I then borrow from contemporary ideas in the philosophy of measurement to demonstrate that scale type can only be established in the context of well-developed theory and through experimentation. I conclude that current notions of scale type are of limited use, and that scale type ought to occupy a lesser role in psychometric discourse and pedagogy.\",\"PeriodicalId\":93139,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psych\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psych\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/psych5020018\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psych","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/psych5020018","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

史蒂文斯将量表分为名义量表、序数量表、区间量表和比率量表,这是心理学和教育测量中最具争议性但最具弹性的观点之一。在这篇文章中,我对规模类型对于这些领域的措施发展至关重要的观点提出了质疑。我强调了许多研究人员如何对量表类型的概念,特别是区间水平测量的概念进行不同的解释。这些(通常未说明的)观点差异导致了对什么证据适合证明区间水平测量的困惑,以及量表类型对实践研究的影响。然后,我借鉴了当代计量哲学的思想,证明只有在发达的理论和实验的背景下才能建立量表类型。我的结论是,目前量表类型的概念用途有限,量表类型在心理测量话语和教育学中的作用应该较小。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Scale Type Revisited: Some Misconceptions, Misinterpretations, and Recommendations
Stevens’s classification of scales into nominal, ordinal, interval, and ratio types is among the most controversial yet resilient ideas in psychological and educational measurement. In this essay, I challenge the notion that scale type is essential for the development of measures in these fields. I highlight how the concept of scale type, and of interval-level measurement in particular, is variously interpreted by many researchers. These (often unstated) differences in perspectives lead to confusion about what evidence is appropriate to demonstrate interval-level measurement, as well as the implications of scale type for research in practice. I then borrow from contemporary ideas in the philosophy of measurement to demonstrate that scale type can only be established in the context of well-developed theory and through experimentation. I conclude that current notions of scale type are of limited use, and that scale type ought to occupy a lesser role in psychometric discourse and pedagogy.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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