Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Some Conceptual Housecleaning

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Validating Psychological Constructs

Abstract

The chapter examines the conceptual terrain of Construct Validity Theory (CVT) through a historical and conceptual analysis of its major concepts, including the ever-evasive ‘construct’ concept and its progenitor, the ‘hypothetical construct.’ The various ontological stances that have been adopted regarding constructs are summarized. Concrete examples of confusing or otherwise ambiguous uses of these terms are given, and a common but pernicious tendency to conflate construct terms with the attributes presumably designated by those terms is critiqued. A number of additional conceptual problems within the CVT discourse are highlighted and contrasted with alternative readings. Some possible explanations for the conceptual ambiguities within CVT discourse are also explored.

Basically, all that is formally required of a definition is that it be clear; that it enable reliable use of the concept concerned.

—Guttman (1971, p. 329).

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
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

References

  • American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnulf, J. K., Larsen, K. R., Martinsen, Ø. L., & Bong, C. H. (2014). Predicting survey responses: How and why semantics shape survey statistics on organizational behaviour. PLoS ONE, 9(9), e106361.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Baker, G. P., & Hacker, P. M. S. (1982). The grammar of psychology: Wittgenstein’s bemerkungen über die philosophie der psychology. Language & Communication, 2, 227–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bechtoldt, H. P. (1959). Construct validity: A critique. American Psychologist, 14, 619–629.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, M. R., & Hacker, P. M. S. (2003). Philosophical foundations of neuroscience. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Billig, M. (2011). Writing social psychology: Fictional things and unpopulated texts. British Journal of Social Psychology, 50, 4–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Billig, M. (2013). Learn to write badly: How to succeed in the social sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Billig, M., & Marinho, C. (2015). Rhetoric and psychology: Ending the dominance of nouns. In J. Martin, J. Sugarman, & K. L. Slaney (Eds.), The Wiley handbook of theoretical and philosophical psychology: Methods, approaches and new directions for social science (pp. 117–132). London: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borsboom, D. (2006). The attack of the psychomatricians. Psychometrika, 71, 425–440.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Borsboom, D., Mellenbergh, G. J., & van Heerden, J. (2004). The concept of validity. Psychological Review, 111, 1061–1071.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Borsboom, D., Cramer, A. O. J., Kievit, R. A., Scholtan, A. Z., & Franic, S. (2009). The end of construct validity. In R. W. Lissitz (Ed.), The concept of validity: Revisions, new directions, and applications (pp. 135–170). Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brodbeck, M. (1957). The philosophy of science and educational research. Review of Educational Research, 27, 427–440.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang, H. (1995). Circularity and reliability in measurement. Perspectives on Science, 3, 153–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colman, A. M. (2006). A dictionary of psychology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crandall, C. S., & Schaller, M. (2001). Social psychology and the pragmatic conduct of science. Theory & Psychology, 11, 479–488.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity and psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52, 281–302.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Danziger, K. (1993). Psychological objects, practice, and history. Annals of Theoretical Psychology, 8, 15–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Danziger, K. (1997). Naming the mind: How psychology found its language. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • English, H. B., & English, A. C. (1958). A comprehensive dictionary of psychological and psychoanalytic terms: A guide to usage. New York: David McKay Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guttman, L. (1971). Measurement as structural theory. Psychometrika, 36, 329–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guttman, L. (1977). What is not what in Statistics. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series D (The Statistician), 26, 81–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, P. R. (1984). Shyness and psychological imperialism: On the dangers of ignoring the ordinary language roots of the terms we deal with. European Journal of Social Psychology, 14, 169–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hattie, J. A. (1985). Methodology review: Assessing unidimensionality of tests and items. Applied Psychological Measurement, 9, 139–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heidenreich, C. A. (1968). A dictionary of general psychology: Basic terminology and key concepts. Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall/Hunt Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Helmstadter, G. C. (1964). Principles of psychological measurement. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, P. W. (2002). Construct validity and the language of inquiry. In H. I. Braun, D. N. Jackson, & D. E. Wiley (Eds.), The role of constructs in psychological and educational measurement (pp. 299–317). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, S. H., & Maraun, M. D. (1996). Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must remain silent. Personality and Individual Differences, 21, 115–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kane, M. T. (2006). Validation. In R. L. Brennan (Ed.), Educational measurement (4th ed.). Washington, DC: American Council on Education/Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, R. M., & Saccuzzo, D. P. (1993). Psychological testing: Principles, applications, and issues (3rd ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Cole Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kimble, G. A. (1989). Psychology from the standpoint of a generalist. American Psychologist, 44, 491–499.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koch, S. (1992). Psychology’s Bridgman vs. Bridgman’s Bridgman: An essay in reconstruction. Theory & Psychology, 2, 261–290.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamiell, J. T. (2013). On psychology’s struggle for existence: Some reflections on Wundt’s 1913 essay a century on. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 33, 205–215.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loevinger, J. (1957). Objective tests as instruments of psychological theory. Psychological Reports, 3, 635–694.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lovasz, N., & Slaney, K. L. (2013). What makes a hypothetical construct “hypothetical”? Tracing the origins and uses of the ‘hypothetical construct’ concept in psychological science. New Ideas in Psychology, 31, 22–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacCorquodale, K., & Meehl, P. E. (1948). On a distinction between hypothetical constructs and intervening variables. Psychological Review, 55, 95–107.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Maraun, M. (1998). Measurement as a normative practice: Implications of Wittgenstein’s philosophy for psychological measurement. Theory and Psychology, 8, 435–461.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maraun, M. D. (2003). Myths and confusions: Psychometrics and the latent variable model. Unpublished Manuscript. Retrieved from http://www.sfu.ca/~maraun/myths-and-confusions.html.

  • Maraun, M. D. (2012). Validity and measurement. Measurement, 10, 80–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maraun, M. D., & Gabriel, S. M. (2013). Illegitimate concept equating in the partial fusion of construct validation theory and latent variable modeling. New Ideas in Psychology, 31, 32–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maraun, M. D., & Halpin, P. (2008). Manifest and latent variates. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 6, 113–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maraun, M., & Peters, J. (2005). What does it mean that an issue is conceptual in nature? Journal of Personality Assessment, 85, 128–133.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Maraun, M. D., Slaney, K. L., & Gabriel, S. M. (2009). The Augustinian methodological family of psychology. New Ideas in Psychology, Special Issue: Mind, Meaning, and Language: Wittgenstein’s Relevance for Psychology, 27, 148–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDonald, R. P. (1981). The dimensionality of tests and items. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 34, 100–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meehl, P. E. (1989). Autobiography. In G. Lindzey (Ed.), History of psychology in autobiography (Vol. VIII, pp. 337–389). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Messick, S. (1981). Constructs and their vicissitudes in educational and psychological measurement. Psychological Bulletin, 89, 575–588.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michell, J. (2013). Constructs, inferences, and mental measurement. New Ideas in Psychology, 31, 13–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newton, P. E. (2012). Clarifying the consensus definition of validity. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 10, 1–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newton, P. E., & Baird, J. (2016). Editorial: The great validity debate. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 23, 173–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newton, P. E., & Shaw, S. (2013). Standards for talking and thinking about validity. Psychological Methods, 18, 301–319.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Newton, P. E., & Shaw, S. (2014). Validity in educational and psychological assessment. London: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Newton, P. E., & Shaw, S. (2016). Disagreement over the best way to use the word ‘validity’ and options for reaching consensus. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy, & Practice, 23, 178–197.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norris, S. P. (1983). The inconsistencies at the foundation of construct validation theory. In E. House (Ed.), Philosophy of evaluation (pp. 54–74). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nunnally, J. C. (1967). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill Book.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orton, R. (1987). The foundations of construct validity: Towards an update. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 21, 23–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peak, H. (1953). Problems of objective observation. In L. Festinger & D. Katz (Eds.), Research methods in the behavioral sciences (pp. 243–299). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, K. (1892). The grammar of science. London: Walter Scott Publishing Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Racine, T. P. (2015). Conceptual analysis. In J. Martin, J. Sugarman, & K. L. Slaney (Eds.), The Wiley handbook of theoretical and philosophical psychology: Methods, approaches and new directions for social science (pp. 39–52). London: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reber, A. S. (1985). The Penguin dictionary of psychology. Middlesex: Viking.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, T. B. (1989). Operationism in psychology: A discussion of contextual antecedents and an historical interpretation of its longevity. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 25, 139–153.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Russell, B. (1917). Mysticism and logic and other essays. Auckland: The Floating Press. Retrieved from http://www.ebrary.com.proxy.lib.sfu.ca.

  • Sarbin, T. R. (1968). Ontology recapitulates philology: The mythic nature of anxiety. American Psychologist, 23, 411–418.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Slaney, K. L. (2001). On empirical realism and the defining of theoretical terms. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 22, 132–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slaney, K. L. (2015). “I’m not that kind of psychologist”: A case for methodological pragmatism in theoretical inquiries in psychological science practices. In J. Martin, J. Sugarman, & K. L. Slaney (Eds.), The Wiley handbook of theoretical and philosophical psychology: Methods, approaches and new directions for social science (pp. 343–358). London: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slaney, K. L. (2016). The multiplicity of validity: A game within a game? Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 23, 293–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slaney, K. L., & Garcia, D. A. (2015). Constructing psychological objects: The rhetoric of constructs. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 35, 244–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slaney, K. L., & Maraun, M. D. (2008). A proposed framework for conducting data-based test analysis. Psychological Methods, 13x, 376–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slaney, K. L., & Racine, T. P. (2011). On the ambiguity of concept use in psychology: Is the concept “concept” a useful concept? Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 31, 73–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slaney, K. L., & Racine, T. P. (2013). What’s in a name? Psychology’s ever-evasive construct. New Ideas in Psychology, 31, 4–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slaney, K. L., Storey, J. E., & Barnes, J. (2011). “Is my test valid?”: Guidelines for the practicing psychologist for evaluating the psychometric properties of measures. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 10, 261–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smedslund, J. (1980). From ordinary to scientific language: Reply to Jones. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 21, 231–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smedslund, J. (1988). Psycho-logic. Berlin: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Smedslund, J. (1994). Non-empirical and empirical components in the hypotheses of five social psychological experiments. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 35, 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smedslund, J. (1995). Psychologic: Commonsense and the pseudoempirical. In J. A. Smith, R. Harré, & L. Van Langenhove (Eds.), Rethinking psychology (pp. 196–206). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thorndike, R. L., & Hagen, E. (1969). Measurement and evaluation in education and psychology (3rd ed.). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallach, L., & Wallach, M. A. (2001a). Experiments in social psychology: Science or self-deception? Theory & Psychology, 11, 41–473.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallach, L., & Wallach, M. A. (2001b). A response on concepts, laws and measurement in social psychology. Theory & Psychology, 11, 489–494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiley, D. E. (2002). Validity of constructs versus construct validity of scores. In H. I. Braun, D. N. Jackson, & D. E. Wiley (Eds.), The role of constructs in psychological and educational measurement (pp. 207–277). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wittgenstein, L. (1953). Philosophical investigations (G.E.M. Anscombe, Trans). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wundt, W. (1913/2013). Psychology’s struggle for existence (J.T. Lamiell, Trans.). History of Psychology, 16, 195–209.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, M. A. (1989). The relation between political efficacy and citizen participation: Construct validation studies. Journal of Personality Assessment, 53, 554–566.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC, Canada

    Kathleen Slaney

Authors
  1. Kathleen Slaney
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kathleen Slaney .

Copyright information

© 2017 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Slaney, K. (2017). Some Conceptual Housecleaning. In: Validating Psychological Constructs. Palgrave Studies in the Theory and History of Psychology. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-38523-9_8

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation