Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2006 Sep;71(3):425-440.
doi: 10.1007/s11336-006-1447-6. Epub 2006 Sep 23.

The attack of the psychometricians

Denny Borsboom  1
Affiliations

The attack of the psychometricians

Denny Borsboom. Psychometrika. 2006 Sep.

Abstract

This paper analyzes the theoretical, pragmatic, and substantive factors that have hampered the integration between psychology and psychometrics. Theoretical factors include the operationalist mode of thinking which is common throughout psychology, the dominance of classical test theory, and the use of "construct validity" as a catch-all category for a range of challenging psychometric problems. Pragmatic factors include the lack of interest in mathematically precise thinking in psychology, inadequate representation of psychometric modeling in major statistics programs, and insufficient mathematical training in the psychological curriculum. Substantive factors relate to the absence of psychological theories that are sufficiently strong to motivate the structure of psychometric models. Following the identification of these problems, a number of promising recent developments are discussed, and suggestions are made to further the integration of psychology and psychometrics.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. AERA, APA, & NCME (American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education) Joint Committee on Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: AERA.
    1. None
    2. Bartholomew, D.J. (2004). Measuring intelligence: Facts and fallacies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    1. {'text': '', 'ref_index': 1, 'ids': [{'type': 'DOI', 'value': '10.1016/j.jesp.2005.07.003', 'is_inner': False, 'url': 'https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2005.07.003'}]}
    2. Blanton, H., Jaccard, J., Gonzales, P.M., & Christie, C. (2006). Decoding the implicit association test: Implications for criterion prediction. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42, 192–212.
    1. None
    2. Birnbaum, A. (1968). Some latent trait models and their use in inferring an examinee’s ability. In F.M. Lord, & M.R. Novick (Eds.), Statistical theories of mental test scores. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
    1. None
    2. Bollen, K.A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: Wiley.