Ecological Scale: Theory and Applications, Edited by D.L. Peterson and V.T. Parker, Columbia University Press, 1998. ISBN 0-231-10503-7

2000 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 333-334
Author(s):  
Jan Bengtsson
Waterbirds ◽  
1999 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 484
Author(s):  
P. G. Wells ◽  
D. L. Peterson ◽  
V. T. Parker

2006 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 131-139 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juliane Degner ◽  
Dirk Wentura ◽  
Klaus Rothermund

Abstract: We review research on response-latency based (“implicit”) measures of attitudes by examining what hopes and intentions researchers have associated with their usage. We identified the hopes of (1) gaining better measures of interindividual differences in attitudes as compared to self-report measures (quality hope); (2) better predicting behavior, or predicting other behaviors, as compared to self-reports (incremental validity hope); (3) linking social-cognitive theories more adequately to empirical research (theory-link hope). We argue that the third hope should be the starting point for using these measures. Any attempt to improve these measures should include the search for a small-scale theory that adequately explains the basic effects found with such a measure. To date, small-scale theories for different measures are not equally well developed.


Methodology ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 156-164 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keith A. Markus

Abstract. Bollen and colleagues have advocated the use of formative scales despite the fact that formative scales lack an adequate underlying theory to guide development or validation such as that which underlies reflective scales. Three conceptual impediments impede the development of such theory: the redefinition of measurement restricted to the context of model fitting, the inscrutable notion of conceptual unity, and a systematic conflation of item scores with attributes. Setting aside these impediments opens the door to progress in developing the needed theory to support formative scale use. A broader perspective facilitates consideration of standard scale development concerns as applied to formative scales including scale development, item analysis, reliability, and item bias. While formative scales require a different pattern of emphasis, all five of the traditional sources of validity evidence apply to formative scales. Responsible use of formative scales requires greater attention to developing the requisite underlying theory.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document