The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Quantitative science and the definition of measurement in psychology
Abstract
It is argued that establishing quantitative science involves two research tasks: the scientific one of showing that the relevant attribute is quantitative; and the instrumental one of constructing procedures for numerically estimating magnitudes. In proposing quantitative theories and claiming to measure the attributes involved, psychologists are logically committed to both tasks. However, they have adopted their own, special, definition of measurement, one that deflects attention away from the scientific task. It is argued that this is not accidental. From Fechner onwards, the dominant tradition in quantitative psychology ignored this task. Stevens' definition rationalized this neglect. The widespread acceptance of this definition within psychology made this neglect systemic, with the consequence that the implications of contemporary research in measurement theory for undertaking the scientific task are not appreciated. It is argued further that when the ideological support structures of a science sustain serious blind spots like this, then that science is in the grip of some kind of thought disorder. …unluckily our professors of psychology in general are not up to quantitative logic… E. L. Thorndike to J. McK. Cattell, 1904
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Representing and Intervening: Introductory Topics in the Philosophy of Natural Science
Hacking, I. (1983) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511814563 · Cited by 4,814
On the Theory of Scales of Measurement
Stevens, S. S. (1946) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.103.2684.677 · Cited by 4,761 · cited 2×
“Stevens (1975, pp. 46-47) said: 'Measurement is the assignment of numbers to objects or events according to rule (Stevens, 1946).”
Background
Cited by
Item Response Theory and Clinical Measurement
Reise, S. P., & Waller, N. G. (2009) · Annual Review of Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.clinpsy.032408.153553 · Cited by 719
Summative Assessment in Higher Education: Practices in disarray
Knight, P. T. (2002) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075070220000662 · Cited by 386
The Phenomenological Movement and Research in the Human Sciences
Giorgi, A. (2005) · Nursing Science Quarterly · doi:10.1177/0894318404272112 · Cited by 373
Theoretical Considerations and Development of a Questionnaire to Measure Trust in Automation
Körber, M. (2019) · Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-96074-6_2 · Cited by 317
Psychological testing and psychological assessment: A review of evidence and issues.
Meyer, G. J., Finn, S. E., Eyde, L. D., Kay, G. G., Moreland, K. L., Dies, R. R., Eisman, E. J., Kubiszyn, T. W., & Reed, G. M. (2001) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037//0003-066x.56.2.128 · Cited by 1,469
Metadata
- Authors
- Michell, J.
- Venue
- British Journal of Psychology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1997-08
- Volume
- 88
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 355-383
- ISSN
- 0007-1269 (ISSN-L)
- 2044-8295
- OpenAlex
- W1972946528
- Cited by
- 426
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 16.54
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Quantitative science and the definition of measurement in psychology. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1997.tb02641.x
- The paper
- Michell, J. (1997). Quantitative science and the definition of measurement in psychology. British Journal of Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1997.tb02641.x
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.