Are Psychological Quantities and Measurement Relevant in the 21st Century?

  title={Are Psychological Quantities and Measurement Relevant in the 21st Century?},
  author={Joshua A McGrane},
  journal={Frontiers in Psychology},
  • J. McGrane
  • Published 18 May 2010
  • Psychology
  • Frontiers in Psychology
Osborne (2010, p. 1) argues that as quantitative psychologists we must “keep challenging ourselves…and…continue questioning and examining our tacit assumptions”. Whilst I wholeheartedly endorse the critical and optimistic spirit of his article, I find it alarming that he only implicitly directs quantitative psychologists to question and examine their most fundamental tacit assumption. This is the claim, or rather, inadequately tested hypothesis that continuous, psychological quantities exist… 
Single-Case Research Methods: History and Suitability for a Psychological Science in Need of Alternatives
It is argued that the philosophical roots of SCMs can be found in the ideas of authors who recognized the importance of understanding both the generality and individuality of psychological functioning, and should be considered as an alternative to NHST.


Challenges for Quantitative Psychology and Measurement in the 21st Century
The promise of quantitative study of psychology is also one of its greatest challenges: demonstrating in a convincing way that quantification of behavioral, cognitive, biological, and psychological processes is valid and that the analyses the authors subject the numbers to are honest efforts at elucidation rather than obfuscation.
The Function of Measurement in Modern Physical Science
AT the University of Chicago, the facade of the Social Science Research Building bears Lord Kelvin's famous dictum: "If you cannot measure, your knowledge is meager and unsatisfactory."' Would that
Measurement Theory, Psychology and the Revolution That Cannot Happen
Doubt is raised that revolutions in measurement theory, for example conjoint measurement or Rasch measurement, will lead to the quantification of psychological attributes. First, the meaning of
Treating the Pathology of Psychometrics: An Example from the Comprehension of Continuous Prose Text
Camilli, G. (2006). Test fairness. In R. Brennan (Ed.), Educational measurement (4th ed., pp. 221–256). Westport, CT: American Council on Education and Praeger. Kane, M. (2007). Validation. In R.
The attack of the psychometricians
This paper analyzes the theoretical, pragmatic, and substantive factors that have hampered the integration between psychology and psychometrics and a number of promising recent developments are discussed.
The concept of validity : revisions, new directions, and applications
Introduction, Robert W. Lissitz. PART I: RELATIVELY MAINSTREAM. Packing and Unpacking Sources of Validity Evidence: History Repeats Itself Again, Stephen G. Sireci. Validating the Interpretations and
An introduction to the logic of psychological measurement
Contents: Preface. Part I: Theory. Section I: Some History. Making the Myth of Mental Measurement. Section II: And Philosophy. The Theory of Measurement in Psychology. What Quantity and Measurement
Measurement in psychology: A critical history of a methodological concept.
1. Trusting number, forsaking measure 2. The mental measurement nexus 3. The logic of quantification 4. Safety in numbers 5. Break-out from the classical paradigm 6. Beyond measure 7. Made to measure
Understanding the unit in the Rasch model.
The paper shows that two or more frames of reference may have different implicit units without destroying sufficiency, and summarises an approach that can be used in practice to express measurements across different frames ofreference in the same unit.