Subjective measurements (rating theory)

Authors

Keywords:

expert estimates, rating, Fechner law, Stevens law, measurement theory

Abstract

In this paper, a version of the theory of measurements is proposed. The introduction provides links to papers that discuss various measurement theories. In order for a measurement to satisfy strict mathematical criteria, it is necessary to confirm the quantitative nature of the attributes. However, most dimensions in psychology do not satisfy these strict criteria. The paper assumes that this state of affairs is explained not by the lack of competence among specialists, but by the lack of a measurement theory within which such a test could be performed. It is concluded that, within the framework of the existing theory of representative measurements, such a check is not provided. In this connection, the paper proposes to use the theory of ratings instead of a representative theory of measurements. A brief formulation of rating theory is given. It is emphasized that using the theory of ratings it is possible to empirically confirm the quantitative nature of the measured attribute. A real-world example of effective data analysis is analyzed. The application of rating theory allows us to eliminate the paradoxical contradiction between the laws of Fechner and Stevens and confirm the quantitative nature of the values obtained by subjective measurement methods.

Author Biography

  • Vasily M. Romanchak, Belarusian National Technical University, 65 Niezaliežnasci Avenue, Minsk 220013, Belarus

    PhD (physics and mathematics), docent; associate professor at the department of engineering mathematics, faculty of engineering and physics

References

  1. Bandalos DL. Measurement theory and applications for the social sciences. New York: The Guilford Press; 2018. 686 p.
  2. Vessonen E. Psychometrics versus representational theory of measurement. Philosophy of the Social Sciences. 2017;47(4–5):330–350. DOI: 10.1177/0048393117705299.
  3. Michell J. Measurement in psychology: a critical history of a methodological concept. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1999. 250 p. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511490040.
  4. Michell J. Is psychometrics pathological science? Measurement. 2008;6:7–24. DOI: 10.1080/15366360802035489.
  5. Stevens SS. On the theory of scales of measurement. Science. 1946;103(7):677–680.
  6. Barrett P. The consequence of sustaining a pathology: scientific stagnation – a commentary on the target article «Is psychometrics a pathological science?» by Joel Michell. Measurement. 2008;6:78–123. DOI: 10.1080/1536636080-2035521.
  7. Romanchak VM. Model of rating of non physical quantity. System Analysis and Applied Information Science. 2017;4:39–44. DOI: 10.21122/2309-4923-2017-4-39-44. Russiаn.
  8. Romanchak VM. The subjective measurement of probability. Informatics. 2018;2(15):74–82. Russiаn.
  9. Zabrodin JuM, Lebedev AN. Psikhofiziologiya i psikhofizika [Psychophysiology and psychophysics]. Moscow: Nauka; 1977. 288 p. Russiаn.
  10. Tolstova YuN. [A brief history of the development of representative measurement theory]. Zavodskaja laboratorija. 1999;3:49–57. Russiаn.
  11. Luce RD, Suppes P. Representational measurement theory. In: Wixted J, Pashler H, editors. Stevens’ handbook of experimental psychology. Methodology in experimental psychology. New York: Wiley; 2004. p. 1–41. DOI: 10.1002/0471214426.pas0401.
  12. Gusev AN, Izmailov ChA, Mikhalevskaya MB. Izmerenie v psikhologii. Obshchii psikhologicheskii praktikum [Measurement in psychology. General psychological workshop]. Moscow: Smysl; 1997. 287 p. Russian.
  13. Gusev AN, Utochkin IS. Psikhologicheskie izmereniya. Teoriya. Metody [Psychological measurements. Theory. Methods]. Moscow: Aspekt Press; 2011. 317 p. Russian.
  14. Cliff N. Abstract measurement theory and the revolution that never happened. Psychological Science. 1992;3(3):186–190. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.1992.tb00024.x.
  15. Trendler G. Measurement theory, psychology and the revolution that cannot happen. Theory & Psychology. 2009;19(5):579–599. DOI: 10.1177/0959354309341926.
  16. Wickelmaier F, Schmid C. A Matlab function to estimate choice model parameters from paired-comparison data. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers Comput. 2004;36(1):29–40. DOI: 10.3758/BF03195547.
  17. Bell JL. Category theory and the foundations of mathematics. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science. 1981;32: 349–358. DOI: 10.1093/bjps/32.4.349.
  18. Friedman AA. Mir kak prostranstvo i vremya [The world is like space and time]. Moscow: Nauka; 1965. 112 p. Russian.
  19. Lubashevsky I. Psychophysical laws as reflection of mental space properties. Physics of Life Reviews. 2019;31:276–303. DOI: 10.1016/j.plrev.2018.10.003.

Downloads

Published

2020-11-04

Issue

No. 3 (2020): Journal of the Belarusian State University. Philosophy and Psychology

Section

Methods of Psychological Research

License

The authors who are published in this journal agree to the following:

  1. The authors retain copyright on the work and provide the journal with the right of first publication of the work on condition of license Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial. 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0).
  2. The authors retain the right to enter into certain contractual agreements relating to the non-exclusive distribution of the published version of the work (e.g. post it on the institutional repository, publication in the book), with the reference to its original publication in this journal.
  3. The authors have the right to post their work on the Internet (e.g. on the institutional store or personal website) prior to and during the review process, conducted by the journal, as this may lead to a productive discussion and a large number of references to this work. (See The Effect of Open Access.)

How to Cite

[1]
Romanchak, .V.M. 2020. Subjective measurements (rating theory). Journal of the Belarusian State University. Philosophy and Psychology. 3 (Nov. 2020), 87–98.