Skip to main content

Measurability

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Measurement and Probability

Part of the book series: Springer Series in Measurement Science and Technology ((SSMST))

  • 1922 Accesses

Abstract

This is a key question in measurement science and it is closely related to another fundamental one: what really is measurement or, in other words, what is a good definition of measurement? Considering such a question may thus be a good starting point for an overall reflection on measurement [1, 2].

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The language issue has deserved great attention in measurement in the last thirty years. In 1984 the International Vocabulary of basic and general terms in metrology (VIM) was published as the result of a joint effort of authoritative international scientific and technical organisations [4], which has now come to the third edition, with substantial revisions [5, 6]. Yet the proposed terminology may not be general enough for accomplish the vision of measurement in behavioural sciences [7]. For this reasons, we will sometimes depart to the VIM terminology in this book [8]. For the reader’s convenience a short collection of key terms is presented in the appendix at the end of the book.

  2. 2.

    When modelling the measurement process, as we will do especially in Chap. 5, the terms “quantity” and measurand are often quite interchangeable. The difference concerns whether we think at the model as applied in a specific situation or intended to represent a large class of possible situations. Often both interpretation are possible and feasible.

  3. 3.

    The distinction among these terms is not purely linguistic, yet we prefer not to dwell into this at this stage.

  4. 4.

    In Helmholtz’s language, concrete numbers are those arising from the counting of real objects.

  5. 5.

    Note that in this discussion we use the term “property” in three meanings: either to denote the property we want to measure or the empirical relations and operations that characterise it or even the formal properties of such empirical relations and operations. So, for example, length is a measurable property, characterised by the empirical properties of order and addition, and order, e.g., is characterised by the transitivity (formal) property. This is a drawback of using the term “property” for denoting what we want to measure, as in fact is recommendend by current international guidelines [6], that perhaps have not considered enough such theoretical aspects. This is why in other papers we have used the term “characteristic” instead [1]. Here we have preferred to follow the international recommendation, hoping that the discourse is still clear enough, although with some effort, to the reader.

  6. 6.

    This notation is subsequent to Helmoltz and is the one we will use routinely throughout the book. The general notation principles adopted in this book and a list of some of the main symbols, grouped by subjects, are reported in the appendix at the end of the book.

  7. 7.

    In reality, measurability under not ordered structure is also of interest, as we will see in the following of this chapter.

  8. 8.

    Remember that we have assumed, in this example, that all the objects, including their combinations, can be put on each pan of the balance. Note also from this, the importance of properly defining the class of objects under consideration. In the notion of scale it is implicitly assumed that for each object there is an element in the scale which is equivalent to it. An element of a scale is called a standard.

  9. 9.

    For mercury, around room temperature \(\alpha =0.00018\,^{\circ }\mathrm C ^{-1}\) [12]. In practical application, the thermal expansion of the thermometer glass should also be accounted for, but such details are ineessential here.

  10. 10.

    Although magnitude estimation can be considered a measurement method, the other three are rather scaling procedures. The difference is subtle, often overlooked, but substantial. In a scaling method, the aim is to assigning numbers to a set of objects, in order to constitute a scale for the quantity of interest. Instead in measurement the goal is to assign numbers to one, or more objects, in respect of a previously established scale. In the case of magnitude estimation, the previously established scale is assumed to be some inner scale in the subject(s). In ratio estimation or production it is not necessary to dispose of such a scale, but only to be able to perceive ratios. This difference will be easier to understand after reading Chaps. 35 of this book. We will consider ratio estimation or production at a later stage in this section, when dealing with the classification of measurement scales.

  11. 11.

    In fact this term was introduced later on—Stevens rather spoke of “mathematical group structure”—but we prefer it since it is perhaps easier to understand.

  12. 12.

    This paved the way to the representational theory of measurement, as we will see in a moment.

  13. 13.

    Thus, continuing the discussion in Footnote 11, whilst magnitude estimation may be regarded as a measurement method, ratio estimation and production are rather scaling procedures, which allow obtaining a ratio scale even when there is no empirical addition operation, as usually happens with perceptual quantities. We will discuss in dept this important and conceptually difficult point in Chap. 3.

  14. 14.

    In contrast to this, the role of persons as “measuring instruments” has been recently highlighted [38]. We will amply discuss this subject in Chap. 8.

  15. 15.

    We introduced the term “measurand” in Sect. 1.1 [6]. See also the glossary in the appendix at the end of the book.

  16. 16.

    Note how the idea of interpreting signs produced by instruments, suggest by Rossi, comes into play.

  17. 17.

    We will discuss loudness measurement in some detail in Chap. 8.

References

  1. Rossi, G.B.: Measurability. Measurement 40, 545–562 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Mari, L.: Measurability. In: Boumans, M. (ed.) Measurement in Economics, pp. 41–77. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Campbell, N.R.: Physics—The Elements. Reprinted as: Foundations of Science. (1957). Dover, New York (1920)

    Google Scholar 

  4. BIPM, IEC, OIML, ISO: International Vocabulary of Basic and General Terms in Metrology. ISO, Genève (1984)

    Google Scholar 

  5. BIPM, IEC, IFCC, ISO, IUPAC, IUPAP, OIML: International Vocabulary of Basic and General Terms in Metrology, 2nd edn (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  6. ISO: ISO/IEC Guide 99:2007 International Vocabulary of Metrology—Basic and General Terms (VIM). ISO, Geneva (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Galanter, E., et al.: Measuring the Impossible—Report of the MINET High-Level Expert Group. EU NEST, Bruxelles (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Rossi, G.B.: Cross-disciplinary concepts and terms in measurement. Measurement 42, 1288–1296 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. von Helmholtz, H.: Zählen und Messen Erkenntnis—theoretisch betrachtet. Philosophische Aufsätze Eduard Zeller gewidmet, Fuess, Leipzig (1887)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Kisch, B.: Scales and Weights. Yale University Press, New Haven (1965)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Ellis, B.: Basic Concepts of Measurement. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1968)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Nicholas, J.V., White, D.R.: Traceable Temperatures. Wiley, Chichester (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Rossi, P.: La nascita della scienza moderna in Europa. Laterza, Roma (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Aumala, O.: Fundamentals and trends of digital measurement. Measurement 26, 45–54 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Fechner, G.: Elements of Psychophysics, Leipzig. English edition: (1966) (trans: Adler, H.E.). Holt, New York (1860)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Wozniak, R.H.: Classics in Psychology, 1855–1914: Historical Essays. Thoemmes Press, Bristol (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Jones, F.N.: History of psychophysics and judgement. In: Carterette, E.C., Friedman, M.P. (eds.) Handbook of Perception, vol. 2. Academic Press, New York (1974)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Baird, J.C., Noma, E.: Fundamentals of Scaling and Psychophysics. Wiley, New York (1978)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Berglund, B.: Measurement in psychology. In: Berglund, B., Rossi, G.B., Townsend, J., Pendrill, L. (eds) Measurement with Persons. Taylor and Francis, London, pp. 27–50 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Ferguson, A., Myers, C.S., Bartlett, R.J.: Quantitative estimates of sensory events. Report Br Assoc Adv Sci 108 (1938)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Ferguson, A., Myers, C.S., Bartlett, R.J.: Quantitative estimates of sensory events. Report Br Assoc Adv Sci 2, 331–349 (1940)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Stevens, S.S.: The direct estimation of sensory magnitudes: loudness. Am J Psychol 69, 1–25 (1956)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Stevens, S.S.: Measurement, psychophysics and utility. In: Churchman, C.W., Ratoosh, P. (eds.) Basic Concepts of Measurements. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 1–49 (1959)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Stevens, S.S.: On the theory of scales and measurement. Science 103, 667–680 (1946)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  25. Misra, P., Enge, P.: Global positioning system, 2nd edn. Ganga-Jamuna Press, Lincoln, MA, (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Essen, L.: Time scales. Metrologia 4, 161–165 (1968)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  27. Krantz, D.H., Luce, R.D., Suppes, P., Tversky, A.: Foundations of Measurement, vol. 1. Academic Press, New York (1971)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Miyamoto, J.M.: An axiomatization of the ratio difference representation. J Math Psychol 27, 439–455 (1983)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  29. Roberts, F.S.: Measurement theory, with applications to decision-making, utility and the social sciences. Addison-Wesley, Reading. Digital Reprinting (2009). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1979)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Finkelstein, L., Leaning, M.S.: A review of the fundamental concepts of measurement. Measurement 2, 25–34 (1984)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Narens, L.: Abstract measurement theory. MIT Press, Cambridge (1985)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  32. Suppes, P., Krantz, D.H., Luce, R.D., Tversky, A.: Foundations of Measurement, vol. 2. Academic Press, New York (1989)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Luce, R.D., Krantz, D.H., Suppes, P., Tversky, A.: Foundations of Measurement, vol. 3. Academic Press, New York (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Luce, R.D., Suppes, P.: Representational measurement theory. In: Stevens’ Handbook of Experimental Psychophysics, vol. 4. Wiley, New York (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Finkelstein, L.: Theory and philosophy of measurement. In: Sydenham, P.H. (ed.) Handbook of Measurement Science, vol. 1, pp. 1–30. Wiley, Chichester (1982)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Muravyov, S., Savolainen, V.: Special interpretation of formal measurement scales for the case of multiple heterogeneous properties. Measurement 29, 209–224 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Mari, L.: Beyond the representational viewpoint: a new formalization of measurement. Measurement 27, 71–84 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Berglund, B., Rossi, G.B., Townsend, J., Pendrill, L. (eds.): Measurement with Persons. Taylor and Francis, London (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Gonella, L.: Measuring instruments and theory of measurement. In: Proceedings of XI IMEKO World Congress, Houston (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Rossi, G.B.: A probabilistic model for measurement processes. Measurement 34, 85–99 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Finkelstein, L.: Widely, strongly and weakly defined measurement. Measurement 34, 39–48 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Finkelstein, L.: Problems of measurement in soft systems. Measurement 38, 267–274 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. BIPM: The International System of Units, 8th edn. STEDI, Paris (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  44. Rossi, G.B., Berglund, B.: Measurement of quantities involving human perception and interpretation. Measurement 44, 815–822 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Giovanni Battista Rossi .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Rossi, G.B. (2014). Measurability. In: Measurement and Probability. Springer Series in Measurement Science and Technology. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-8825-0_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics