The new psychometrics: Comment on Appelbaum et al. (2018)

Area of Science:

• Psychometrics
• Quantitative Psychology
• Psychological Measurement

Background:

• Misconceptions exist regarding psychometric measurement in quantitative psychology.
• The "Journal Article Reporting Standards for Quantitative Research in Psychology" (Appelbaum et al., 2018) article has contributed to these misconceptions.
• A need exists for clearer standards in reporting quantitative research in psychology.

Purpose of the Study:

• To correct prevailing misconceptions about psychometric measurement.
• To introduce and outline the principles of "new psychometrics."
• To propose revised terminology and validation approaches in psychological measurement.

Main Methods:

• Critique of existing psychometric validation concepts.
• Proposal of alternative validation frameworks within "new psychometrics."
• Re-definition of key psychometric terms like reliability and validation.

Main Results:

• Advocacy for replacing "construct validation" with "construct-to-measure validation."
• Support for "content validation" over "convergent validation," emphasizing measure-construct content correspondence.
• Restriction of the term "reliability" to denote only score precision.

Conclusions:

• The proposed "new psychometrics" offers a more precise framework for psychological measurement.
• Adoption of these revised standards can improve the clarity and rigor of quantitative research reporting.
• Accurate psychometric measurement is crucial for advancing psychological science.