Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 28, 2026

Psychophysically-anchored, Robust Thresholding in Studying Pain-related Lateralization of Oscillatory Prestimulus Activity
Published on: January 21, 2017
Psychological theory testing versus psychometric nay-saying: comment on Neuberg et al.'s (1997) critique of the need
A W Kruglanski1, M N Atash, E DeGrada
1Department of Psychology, University of Maryland, College Park 20742-4411, USA. arie@bss3.umd.edu
Abstract:
S. L. Neuberg, T. N. Judice, and S. G. West (1997) faulted our work with the Need for Closure Scale (NFCS) on grounds that the NFCS lacks discriminant validity relative to S. L. Neuberg's and J. T. Newsom's (1993) Personal Need for Structure (PNS) Scale and is multidimensional, which, so they claim, renders the use of its total score inadmissible. By contrast, the present authors show that neither of the above assertions is incompatible with the underlying need for closure theory. Relations between NFCS and the PNS are to be expected, as these were designed to operationalize the very same construct (of need for closure). Furthermore, no unidimensionality of the NFCS has been claimed, and none is required to use its total score for testing various theoretically derived predictions. An instrument's ultimate utility hinges on theoretical considerations and empirical evidence rather than on questionable psychometric dogma unrelated to the substantive matters at hand.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
The Scientific Method
Self-Discrepancy Theory
Humanistic Psychology
This approach...
Cognitive Theories: Schachter-Singer Theory of Emotion
Physiological Arousal and Cognitive Labeling
According to this theory, when an individual experiences physiological...
Self-Report Tests of Personality
Need for Self-Esteem

