Cited by 131Psychometric Methodologies and TestingMental Health Research TopicsCategorization, perception, and language

A conceptual and psychometric framework for distinguishing categories and dimensions

De Boeck, Paul, Wilson, Mark, Acton, G. Scott·2005·Psychological Review

Abstract

An important, sometimes controversial feature of all psychological phenomena is whether they are categorical or dimensional. A conceptual and psychometric framework is described for distinguishing whether the latent structure behind manifest categories (e.g., psychiatric diagnoses, attitude groups, or stages of development) is category-like or dimension-like. Being dimension-like requires (a) within-category heterogeneity and (b) between-category quantitative differences. Being category-like requires (a) within-category homogeneity and (b) between-category qualitative differences. The relation between this classification and abrupt versus smooth differences is discussed. Hybrid structures are possible. Being category-like is itself a matter of degree; the authors offer a formalized framework to determine this degree. Empirical applications to personality disorders, attitudes toward capital punishment, and stages of cognitive development illustrate the approach.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0033-295x.112.1.129

Cites

172 of 172 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Birnbaum, A. (1968). Some latent trait models. In F. M. Lord & M. R. Novick (Eds.), Statistical theories of mental test scores (pp. 397-424). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
  2. Livesley, W. J., & Schroeder, M. L. (1990). Continua of personality disorder: The DSM-III-R Cluster A diagnoses. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 178, 627-635.
  3. Maesschalck, C. (1998). A psychometric modelling framework for testing categorical and/or continuous aspects of the borderline, histrionic, and antisocial personality disorders. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, K. U. Leuven, Belgium.
  4. Storms, G., De Boeck, P., & Ruts, W. (2000). Prototype and exemplarbased information in natural language categories. Journal of Memory & Language, 42, 51-73.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
De Boeck, P., Wilson, M., & Acton, G. S.
Venue
Psychological Review
Published
2005
Volume
112
Issue
1
Pages
129-158
ISSN
  • 0033-295X (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1471
OpenAlex
W2149002740
Cited by
131
References
155
Citations by year
2025: 6 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 6
FWCI
15.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychological Review (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (1f32da014739-01)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (P50DA009253, F32-DA14739)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Mental Health Research Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Categorization, perception, and language
Keywords
latent structure, hybrid structures, psychiatric diagnosis, personality disorders, attitudes toward capital punishment, cognitive development stages
MeSH terms
Capital Punishment, Cognition, Humans, Models, Psychological, Psychology, Psychometrics

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