Recognize the Value of the Sum Score, Psychometrics’ Greatest Accomplishment

IF 2.9 2区 心理学 Q1 MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS Psychometrika Pub Date : 2024-04-17 DOI:10.1007/s11336-024-09964-7
Klaas Sijtsma, Jules L. Ellis, Denny Borsboom
{"title":"Recognize the Value of the Sum Score, Psychometrics’ Greatest Accomplishment","authors":"Klaas Sijtsma, Jules L. Ellis, Denny Borsboom","doi":"10.1007/s11336-024-09964-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The sum score on a psychological test is, and should continue to be, a tool central in psychometric practice. This position runs counter to several psychometricians’ belief that the sum score represents a pre-scientific conception that must be abandoned from psychometrics in favor of latent variables. First, we reiterate that the sum score stochastically orders the latent variable in a wide variety of much-used item response models. In fact, item response theory provides a mathematically based justification for the ordinal use of the sum score. Second, because discussions about the sum score often involve its reliability and estimation methods as well, we show that, based on very general assumptions, classical test theory provides a family of lower bounds several of which are close to the true reliability under reasonable conditions. Finally, we argue that eventually sum scores derive their value from the degree to which they enable predicting practically relevant events and behaviors. None of our discussion is meant to discredit modern measurement models; they have their own merits unattainable for classical test theory, but the latter model provides impressive contributions to psychometrics based on very few assumptions that seem to have become obscured in the past few decades. Their generality and practical usefulness add to the accomplishments of more recent approaches.</p>","PeriodicalId":54534,"journal":{"name":"Psychometrika","volume":"302 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychometrika","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-024-09964-7","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The sum score on a psychological test is, and should continue to be, a tool central in psychometric practice. This position runs counter to several psychometricians’ belief that the sum score represents a pre-scientific conception that must be abandoned from psychometrics in favor of latent variables. First, we reiterate that the sum score stochastically orders the latent variable in a wide variety of much-used item response models. In fact, item response theory provides a mathematically based justification for the ordinal use of the sum score. Second, because discussions about the sum score often involve its reliability and estimation methods as well, we show that, based on very general assumptions, classical test theory provides a family of lower bounds several of which are close to the true reliability under reasonable conditions. Finally, we argue that eventually sum scores derive their value from the degree to which they enable predicting practically relevant events and behaviors. None of our discussion is meant to discredit modern measurement models; they have their own merits unattainable for classical test theory, but the latter model provides impressive contributions to psychometrics based on very few assumptions that seem to have become obscured in the past few decades. Their generality and practical usefulness add to the accomplishments of more recent approaches.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
认识总分的价值,心理测量学的最大成就
心理测验的总分是,而且应该继续是,心理测量实践中的核心工具。有几位心理测量学家认为,总分是一种前科学概念,必须从心理测量学中摒弃,转而使用潜变量。首先,我们要重申,在各种常用的项目反应模型中,总分是随机排列潜变量的。事实上,项目反应理论为总分的顺序使用提供了数学上的依据。其次,由于有关总分的讨论往往还涉及其信度和估计方法,我们证明,基于非常一般的假设,经典测验理论提供了一系列下限,其中有几个在合理条件下接近真实信度。最后,我们认为,最终总分的价值来自于它们能够预测实际相关事件和行为的程度。我们的讨论无意诋毁现代测量模型;它们有自己的优点,是经典测验理论无法企及的,但后者基于极少的假设为心理测量学做出了令人印象深刻的贡献,而这些假设在过去几十年中似乎变得模糊不清了。这些模型的通用性和实用性为最新方法的成就锦上添花。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Psychometrika
Psychometrika 数学-数学跨学科应用
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
10.00%
发文量
72
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The journal Psychometrika is devoted to the advancement of theory and methodology for behavioral data in psychology, education and the social and behavioral sciences generally. Its coverage is offered in two sections: Theory and Methods (T& M), and Application Reviews and Case Studies (ARCS). T&M articles present original research and reviews on the development of quantitative models, statistical methods, and mathematical techniques for evaluating data from psychology, the social and behavioral sciences and related fields. Application Reviews can be integrative, drawing together disparate methodologies for applications, or comparative and evaluative, discussing advantages and disadvantages of one or more methodologies in applications. Case Studies highlight methodology that deepens understanding of substantive phenomena through more informative data analysis, or more elegant data description.
期刊最新文献
Correction to: Generalized Structured Component Analysis Accommodating Convex Components: A Knowledge-Based Multivariate Method with Interpretable Composite Indexes. Remarks from the Editor-in-Chief. Optimizing Large-Scale Educational Assessment with a "Divide-and-Conquer" Strategy: Fast and Efficient Distributed Bayesian Inference in IRT Models. Ordinal Outcome State-Space Models for Intensive Longitudinal Data. New Paradigm of Identifiable General-response Cognitive Diagnostic Models: Beyond Categorical Data.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1