The DOI matches its Crossref record; 27 of the 27 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Conventional wisdom on measurement: A structural equation perspective.
Abstract
The applicability of 5 conventional guidelines for construct measurement is critically examined: (a) Construct indicators should be internally consistent for valid measures, (b) there are optimal magnitudes of correlations between items, (c) the validity of measures depends on the adequacy with which a specified domain is sampled, (d) within-construct correlations must be greater than between-construct correlations, and (e) linear composites of indicators can replace latent variables. A structural equation perspective is used, showing that without an explicit measurement model relating indicators to latent variables and measurement errors, none of these conventional beliefs hold without qualifications. Moreover, a causal indicator model is presented that sometimes better corresponds to the relation of indicators to a construct than does the classical test theory effect indicator model.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“the psychometric independence of cultural conflict and distance suggests that they are formative (i.e., causal) rather than reflective (i.e., effect) indicators of BII (Bollen & Lennox, 1991).”
From Bicultural Identity Integration (BII): Components and Psychosocial Antecedents (2005) · cites this paper as Bollen & Lennox, 1991
Citations
Cites
The CES-D Scale: A Self-Report Depression Scale for Research in the General Population
Radloff, L. S. (1977) · Applied Psychological Measurement · doi:10.1177/014662167700100306 · Cited by 53,267
An inventory for measuring depression
BECK, A. T. (1961) · Archives of General Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1961.01710120031004 · Cited by 38,032
Structural Equations with Latent Variables.
Clogg, C. C., & Bollen, K. A. (1991) · Contemporary Sociology · doi:10.2307/2072165 · Cited by 17,442
Self-citationConvergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix.
Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0046016 · Cited by 17,116
Review of Psychometric theory (2nd ed.).
SITGREAVES, R. (1979) · Contemporary Psychology: A Journal of Reviews · doi:10.1037/018882 · Cited by 11,425
A self-rating depression scale
ZUNG, W. W. K. (1965) · Archives of General Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1965.01720310065008 · Cited by 9,813
Statistical Theories of Mental Test Scores
Rozeboom, W. W., Lord, F. M., Novick, M. R., & Birnbaum, A. (1969) · American Educational Research Journal · doi:10.2307/1162101 · Cited by 8,022
Rozeboom, W. W., Lord, F. M., Novick, M. R., & Birnbaum, A. (1969) · American Educational Research Journal · doi:10.3102/00028312006001112 · Cited by 8,013
"General Intelligence," Objectively Determined and Measured
Spearman, C. (1904) · The American Journal of Psychology · doi:10.2307/1412107 · Cited by 6,207
Measurement of social-evaluative anxiety.
Watson, D., & Friend, R. (1969) · Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0027806 · Cited by 3,467
Cited by
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879 · Cited by 82,194
A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015) · Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science · doi:10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8 · Cited by 38,459
Vandenberg, R. J., & Lance, C. E. (2000) · Organizational Research Methods · doi:10.1177/109442810031002 · Cited by 7,997
An Examination of the Nature of Trust in Buyer-Seller Relationships
Doney, P. M., & Cannon, J. P. (1997) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.2307/1251829 · Cited by 6,822
Knowledge management: An organizational capabilities perspective
Gold, A. H., Malhotra, A., & Segars, A. H. (2001) · Journal of Management Information Systems · doi:10.1080/07421222.2001.11045669 · Cited by 6,233
Metadata
- Authors
- Bollen, K., & Lennox, R.
- Affiliations
- University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
- ORCID
- Bollen, Kenneth
- Venue
- Psychological Bulletin
- Published
- 1991-09
- Volume
- 110
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 305-314
- ISSN
- 0033-2909 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1455
- OpenAlex
- W1980996468
- Cited by
- 3,618
- References
- 25
- Citations by year
- 2026: 216 · 2025: 116 · 2024: 104 · 2023: 123 · 2022: 116 · 2021: 145 · 2020: 113 · 2019: 126 · 2018: 163 · 2017: 139 · 2016: 161 · 2015: 174 · 2014: 168 · 2013: 179 · 2012: 193
- FWCI
- 12.85
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Psychological Bulletin (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Social Sciences › Education › Educational Assessment and Pedagogy
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Mental Health Research Topics
- Keywords
- construct measurement, measurement validity, internal consistency, item correlation, latent variables, measurement error, classical test theory, structural equation modeling
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Conventional wisdom on measurement: A structural equation perspective. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1037/0033-2909.110.2.305
- The paper
- Bollen, K., & Lennox, R. (1991). Conventional wisdom on measurement: A structural equation perspective. Psychological Bulletin. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.110.2.305
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
