Some Behaviorial Science Measurement Concerns and Proposals

Abstract

Primarily from a measurement standpoint, we question some basic beliefs and procedures characterizing the scientific study of human behavior. The relations between observed and unobserved variables are key to an empirical approach to building explanatory theories and we are especially concerned about how the former are used as proxies for the latter. We believe that behavioral science can profitably reconsider the prevailing version of this arrangement because of its vulnerability to limiting idiosyncratic aspects of observed/unobserved variable relations. We describe a general measurement approach that takes into account idiosyncrasies that should be irrelevant to the measurement process but can intrude and may invalidate it in ways that distort and weaken relations among theoretically important variables. To clarify further our major concerns, we briefly describe one version of the measurement approach that fundamentally supports the individual as the primary unit of analysis orientation that we believe should be preeminent in the scientific study of human behavior.

The Data Box and Within-Subject Analyses: A Comment on Nesselroade and Molenaar (2016)

“… Nesselroade and Molenaar (2015:in press) suggest that it is the relationships between latent variables within subjects that are invariant across subjects and thus the appropriate unit of analysis. We disagree and take the view that between factor correlations may differ systematically across subjects.…”

“…Nesselroade and Molenaar (2015:in press) make a strong case for the need to focus on the individual as the unit of analysis and to understand how individuals vary over time and situations or both. We agree.…”

“…Nesselroade and Molenaar (2015:in press) consider the three-way analysis of persons, variables, and occasions first introduced as the data box by Raymond Cattell (1946) and subsequently elaborated by him (Cattell, 1966). They propose a variation of Cattell’s P technique (the correlation of variables over occasions for single individuals) with the introduction of different variables for different individuals.…”

“…However, Kelly’s completely idiographic model did not allow for comparisons across people, whereas Nesselroade and Molenaar (2015:in press) propose that, although the measures might be idiosyncratic, the structural relationships between constructs are the same and allow for theory building.…”

“…That is, Nesselroade and Molenaar (2015:in press) suggest that it is the relationships between latent variables within subjects that are invariant across subjects and thus the appropriate unit of analysis. They dismiss the notion of examining the invariance across subjects of the structure of the factor loadings on particular observed variables within subjects and look for invariance of the higher order between factor structure (see Nesselroade, Gerstorf, Hardy, & Ram, 2007, for a similar argument).…”