Psychometrics versus Representational Theory of Measurement
Accepted version
Peer-reviewed
Repository URI
Repository DOI
Change log
Authors
Vessonen, Elina
Abstract
jats:p Erik Angner has argued that simultaneous endorsement of the representational theory of measurement (RTM) and psychometrics leads to inconsistency. His claim rests on an implicit assumption: RTM and psychometrics are full-fledged approaches to measurement. I argue that RTM and psychometrics are only partial approaches that deal with different aspects of measurement, and that therefore simultaneous endorsement of the two is not inconsistent. The argument has implications for the improvement of measurement practices. </jats:p>
Description
Keywords
validation, representation, measurement, psychometrics, representational theory of measurement
Journal Title
Philosophy of the Social Sciences
Conference Name
Journal ISSN
0048-3931
1552-7441
1552-7441
Volume Title
47
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Publisher DOI
Sponsorship
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: gratefully acknowledges research funding from the following institutions: Cambridge AHRC (Arts and Humanities Research Council) Doctoral Training Partnership; the British Society for the Philosophy of Science; Cambridge Commonwealth, European and International Trust; and Newnham College.