Clinimetrics vs. psychometrics: an unnecessary distinction

Abstract

The term "clinimetrics" was introduced by Feinstein to describe an approach to scale development that ostensibly is different from the more traditional "psychometrics." I argue that, for a number of reasons, it is time for this term to retire from the scene. I show that the clinimetric approach is neither new nor unique, but is rather a subset of psychometrics. Further, because the majority of new developments in scale construction (e.g., new variations of the intraclass correlation, item response theory, structural equation modeling, and cognitive theories) are reported in the psychometric literature, use of the term "clinimetric," especially among people not exposed to traditional test theory, cuts them off from a rich source of information.