The DOI matches its Crossref record; 96 of the 96 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Thinking twice about sum scores
Open accessAbstract
A common way to form scores from multiple-item scales is to sum responses of all items. Though sum scoring is often contrasted with factor analysis as a competing method, we review how factor analysis and sum scoring both fall under the larger umbrella of latent variable models, with sum scoring being a constrained version of a factor analysis. Despite similarities, reporting of psychometric properties for sum scored or factor analyzed scales are quite different. Further, if researchers use factor analysis to validate a scale but subsequently sum score the scale, this employs a model that differs from validation model. By framing sum scoring within a latent variable framework, our goal is to raise awareness that (a) sum scoring requires rather strict constraints, (b) imposing these constraints requires the same type of justification as any other latent variable model, and (c) sum scoring corresponds to a statistical model and is not a model-free arithmetic calculation. We discuss how unjustified sum scoring can have adverse effects on validity, reliability, and qualitative classification from sum score cut-offs. We also discuss considerations for how to use scale scores in subsequent analyses and how these choices can alter conclusions. The general goal is to encourage researchers to more critically evaluate how they obtain, justify, and use multiple-item scale scores.
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
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999) · Structural Equation Modeling A Multidisciplinary Journal · doi:10.1080/10705519909540118 · Cited by 108,788
lavaan : An R Package for Structural Equation Modeling
Rosseel, Y. (2012) · Journal of Statistical Software · doi:10.18637/jss.v048.i02 · Cited by 27,955
Structural Equations with Latent Variables.
Clogg, C. C., & Bollen, K. A. (1991) · Contemporary Sociology · doi:10.2307/2072165 · Cited by 17,442
Structural Equations with Latent Variables
Bollen, K. A. (1989) · Wiley series in probability and statistics · doi:10.1002/9781118619179 · Cited by 17,277
Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research
(2007) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.44-2769 · Cited by 15,614
Psychometric properties of the Beck Depression Inventory: Twenty-five years of evaluation
Beck, A. T., Steer, R. A., & Carbin, M. G. (1988) · Clinical Psychology Review · doi:10.1016/0272-7358(88)90050-5 · Cited by 11,696
The standards for educational and psychological testing.
Eignor, D. R. (2013) · APA handbook of testing and assessment in psychology, Vol. 1: Test theory and testing and assessment in industrial and organizational psychology. · doi:10.1037/14047-013 · Cited by 6,988
Marsh, H. W., Hau, K.-T., & Wen, Z. (2004) · Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal · doi:10.1207/s15328007sem1103_2 · Cited by 6,691
An updated paradigm for scale development incorporating unidimensionality and its assessment
Gerbing, D. W., & Anderson, J. C. (1988) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224378802500207 · Cited by 6,293
Blevins, C. A., Weathers, F. W., Davis, M. T., Witte, T. K., & Domino, J. L. (2015) · Journal of Traumatic Stress · doi:10.1002/jts.22059 · Cited by 5,233
Cited by
Well-being is more than happiness and life satisfaction: a multidimensional analysis of 21 countries
Ruggeri, K., Garcia-Garzon, E., Maguire, Á., Matz, S., & Huppert, F. A. (2020) · Health and Quality of Life Outcomes · doi:10.1186/s12955-020-01423-y · Cited by 844
Sischka, P. E., Costa, A. P., Steffgen, G., & Schmidt, A. F. (2020) · Journal of Affective Disorders Reports · doi:10.1016/j.jadr.2020.100020 · Cited by 245
Bowes, S. M., Blanchard, M. C., Costello, T. H., Abramowitz, A. I., & Lilienfeld, S. O. (2020) · Journal of Research in Personality · doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2020.103992 · Cited by 68
Fütterer, T., Scherer, R., Scheiter, K., Stürmer, K., & Lachner, A. (2023) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2023.104756 · Cited by 70
Rossi, A. A., Marconi, M., Taccini, F., Verusio, C., & Mannarini, S. (2021) · Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.3390/bs11060087 · Cited by 41
Metadata
- Authors
- McNeish, D., & Wolf, M. G.
- Venue
- Behavior Research Methods
- Published
- 2020-04-22
- Volume
- 52
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 2287-2305
- ISSN
- 1554-351X (ISSN-L)
- 1554-3528
- OpenAlex
- W3018219061
- Cited by
- 592
- References
- 96
- FWCI
- 45.89
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: Thinking twice about sum scores. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3758/s13428-020-01398-0
- The paper
- McNeish, D., & Wolf, M. G. (2020). Thinking twice about sum scores. Behavior Research Methods. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-020-01398-0
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.
