Implementation of a measurement method or measurement system can be regarded as being situated—at the point of ‘measurement’—about halfway round the quality loop shown in Fig. 2.1.
It is recommended to perform calibration and metrological confirmation prior to embarking on more extensive series of measurements in ‘production’. The confirmation process will be described in Sect. 4.2.
The evaluation of measurement uncertainty is a key step, both in the metrological confirmation process and in subsequent measurements and decision-making, and will be reviewed in Sects. 4.2.2 and 4.2.3 for physical and social measurements, respectively.
How the concepts of calibration and traceability (introduced in Chap. 3) are regarded when performing measurement in the different disciplines, such as physics, engineering, chemistry and the social sciences, will be reviewed in Sects. 4.3. Section 4.4 will look in depth at metrological concepts in the social sciences.
Examples of the results of actually performing measurement spanning the physical and social sciences will round off this chapter (Sect. 4.5) to illustrate treatment of the results of implementing a measurement method or system, including a continuation of the example of pre-packaged goods chosen in this book. As before, templates are provided for the reader to complete the corresponding sections of the measurement task for their chosen case.
KeywordsMeasurement Calibration Metrological confirmation Uncertainty evaluation Multi-disciplinary traceability Case studies
- BCR, Improvements and harmonization in applied metrology. in EUR 9922, Community bureau of reference, DG science, research & development. Commission of the European Communities, ed. by H. Marchandise (1985)Google Scholar
- J.P. Bentley, Principles of Measurement Systems, 4th edn. (Pearson\Prentice-Hall, London\Upper Saddle River, 2004). ISBN-13: 978-0130430281, ISBN-10: 0130430285Google Scholar
- S.J. Cano, J. Melin, L.R. Pendrill and The EMPIR NeuroMET 15HLT04 Consortium, Towards patient-centred cognition metrics, in Joint IMEKO TC1-TC7-TC13-TC18 Symposium: “The future glimmers long before it comes to be”, St. Petersburg, Russia, 2–5 July 2019 (2019)Google Scholar
- E.N. Dzhafarov, Mathematical foundations of universal Fechnerian scaling, in Theory and Methods of Measurements with Persons, ed. by B. Berglund, G. B. Rossi, J. Townsend, L. R. Pendrill, (Psychology Press, Taylor & Francis, Milton Park, 2011)Google Scholar
- EA-4/16, Guideline on the Expression of Uncertainty in Quantitative Testing (EA, Organisation for European Accreditation, Berlin, 2003)Google Scholar
- EU commission, Directive 2014/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to the making available on the market of measuring instruments (2014)Google Scholar
- EURACHEM/CITAC, Traceability in Chemical Measurement—A Guide to Achieving Comparable Results in Chemical Measurement (Eurachem/CITAC, Lisbon, 2003)Google Scholar
- M. Golze, Why do we need traceability and uncertainty evaluation of measurement and test results? ACQUAL 8, 539–540 (2003)Google Scholar
- G. Gooday, The values of precision, ed. M. Norton Wise, Princeton University Press (1995) ISBN 0-691-03759-0Google Scholar
- J.P. Guilford, Psychometric Methods (McGraw-Hill, Inc, New York, 1936), pp. 1–19Google Scholar
- ISO 10012, Measurement Management Systems – Requirements for Measurement Processes and Measuring Equipment (International Standardisation Organisation, Geneva, 2003)Google Scholar
- ISO 5725, Accuracy (Trueness and Precision) of Measurement Methods and Results — Part 1: General Principles and Definitions, ISO 5725-1:1994(en) (International Standardisation Organisation, Geneva, 1994). https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso:5725:-1:ed-1:v1:en:sec:AGoogle Scholar
- ISO/IEC 17043, Conformity Assessment - General Requirements for Proficiency Testing (International Standardisation Organisation, Geneva, 2010)Google Scholar
- S. Ivarsson, B. Johansson, H. Källgren, L.R. Pendrill, Calibration of Submultiples of the Kilogram (SP Report 1989:32 National Testing Institute, Borås, 1989)Google Scholar
- G. Iverson, R.D. Luce, “The representational measurement approach to psychophysical and judgmental problems”, chapter 1, in Measurement, Judgment, and Decision Making, (Academic Press, Cambridge, 1998)Google Scholar
- JCGM 100, Evaluation of Measurement Data – Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement (GUM 1995 with Minor Corrections) (Joint Committee on Guides in Metrology (JCGM), Sèvres, 2008)Google Scholar
- H. Källgren, M. Lauwaars, B. Magnusson, L. Pendrill, P. Taylor, Role of measurement uncertainty in conformity assessment in legal metrology and trade, Accreditation and Quality Assurance – Journal for Quality, Reliability and Comparability in Chemical Measurement, 8, 541–7 (2003)Google Scholar
- K. Koffka, Principles of Gestalt Psychology (Harcourt, Brace, New York, 1935)Google Scholar
- J. M. Linacre, Bernoulli Trials, Fisher Information, Shannon Information and Rasch, Rasch Measurement Transactions 20:3 1062–3 (2006), https://www.rasch.org/rmt/rmt203a.htmGoogle Scholar
- J. Linacre, Sample size and item calibration stability. Rasch Meas. Trans. 7(4), 328 (1994)Google Scholar
- J. M. Linacre, W. P. Fisher, Jr, Harvey Goldstein’s objections to Rasch measurement: a response from Linacre, Fisher, Rasch Meas. Trans., 26:3 1383–9 (2012)Google Scholar
- H.U. Mittmann, M. Golze, A. Schmidt, Accreditation in global trade, ILAC and IAF joint conference on 23–24 September 2002, Berlin, Germany. ACQUAL 8, 315–316 (2003)Google Scholar
- J. Moberg, C. Gooskens, J. Nerbonne, N. Vaillette, Conditional entropy measures intelligibility among related languages, in Proceedings of the 17th Meeting of Computational Linguistics in the Netherlands, (LOT, Utrecht, 2007). https://dspace.library.uu.nl/bitstream/handle/1874/296747/bookpart.pdf?sequence=2Google Scholar
- J. Nerbonne, W. Heering, P. Kleiweg, Edit distance and dialect proximity, in Introduction to reissue edition, Time Warps, String Edits and Macromolecules: The Theory and Practice of Sequence Comparison, ed. by D. Sankoff, J. Kruskal, (CSLI, Stanford, 1999).Google Scholar
- L.R. Pendrill, Discrete ordinal & interval scaling and psychometrics, in Métrologie 2013 Congress, (CFM, Paris, 2013)Google Scholar
- L. R. Pendrill, Meeting future needs for Metrological Traceability – A physicist’s view, Accreditation and Quality Assurance – Journal for Quality, Reliability and Comparability in Chemical Measurement, 10, 133–9, http://www.springerlink.com/content/0dn6x90cmr8hq3v4/?p=2338bc01ade44a208a2d8fb148ecd37aπ (2005)
- L.R. Pendrill, Using measurement uncertainty in decision-making & conformity assessment, Metrologia, 51: S206 (2014)Google Scholar
- Z. Pizlo, Symmetry provides a Turing-type test for 3D vision, in Mathematical Models of Perception and Cognition, ed. by J. W. Houpt, L. M. Blabla, vol. 1, (Routledge, Abingdon, 2016). ISBN 978-1-315-64727-2Google Scholar
- G. Rasch, On general laws and the meaning of measurement in psychology, 321–334 in Proceedings of the Fourth Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability, IV. Berkeley: University of California Press. Available free from Project Euclid (1961)Google Scholar
- G. B. Rossi, Measurement and Probability – A Probabilistic Theory of Measurement with Applications, Springer Series in Measurement Science and Technology, Springer Dordrecht, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-8825-0 (2014)
- K.-D. Sommer, M. Kochsiek, Role of measurement uncertainty in deciding conformance in legal metrology. OIML Bull. XLIII, 19–24 (2002)Google Scholar
- C. Spearman, Correlation calculated from faulty data. Br. J. Psychol. 3, 271–295 (1910)Google Scholar
- P. Tarka, Construction of the measurement scale for consumer’s attitudes in the frame of one-parametric Rasch model, in Acta Universitatis Lodziensis Folia Œconomica, vol. 286, (2013), pp. 333–340. http://dspace.uni.lodz.pl:8080/xmlui/handle/11089/10321?locale-attribute=enGoogle Scholar
- B.D. Wright, Comparing factor analysis and Rasch measurement. Rasch Meas. Trans. 8(1), 3–24 (1994)Google Scholar