首页> 外文期刊>Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives >Other Historical and Philosophical Perspectives on Invariance in Measurement
【24h】

Other Historical and Philosophical Perspectives on Invariance in Measurement

机译:关于测量不变性的其他历史和哲学观点

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Engelhard draws out the similarities and differences in Guttman's, Rasch's, and Mokken's perspectives on invariance in measurement. He provides a valuable model in evaluating the extent to which different measurement theories and methods serve as a basis for achieving the fundamental goals of quantification. The full extent of this point will become more apparent in light of the forthcoming publication of Andrich's (Andrich, 2008) new derivation of the rating scale model from Guttman subspaces, formally cementing the Rasch elaboration of Guttman scaling. nnFocusing on established perspectives on invariance, Engelhard leaves three points in the background:nthe metaphysical status of invariance as the criterion hallmark of meaningfulness and existence, and so of validity nthe place of invariantly calibrated instruments as portable media through which research communities acquire common languages, common points of reference, and the magnified power of distributed cognition nthe role of anomalous failures of invariance in prompting the search for explanations of consistent inconsistencies that might lead to discoveries of new variablesnnnThese points correspond, respectively, to the three moments of the ontological method: reduction, construction, and deconstruction (Heidegger, 1982, pp. 19-23, 320-330). Each will be taken up in turn to point the way toward other ways in which “historical and philosophical work on measurement theories can highlight progress, and in some cases lack of progress, related to various measurement issues and problems” (Engelhard, p. 23).
机译:恩格尔哈德(Engelhard)得出了古特曼(Guttman),拉施(Rasch)和莫克肯(Mokken)关于测量不变性的观点的异同。他提供了一个有价值的模型,用于评估不同的测量理论和方法在多大程度上作为实现量化基本目标的基础。鉴于即将出版的Andrich(Andrich,2008年)从Guttman子空间中得出的新的评级尺度模型,这一点的全部范围将变得更加明显,这正式巩固了Guttman尺度的Rasch阐述。恩格哈德基于既定的不变性观点,在背景中留下了三点:不变性的形而上学状态是有意义和存在的标准标志,有效性是不变的,而固定校准的仪器作为便携式介质可供研究团体用来获取共同语言,共同的参考点和分布式认知的放大功能,不变性异常失败在促使人们寻找可能导致发现新变量的一致不一致的解释方面的作用这些点分别对应于本体论方法的三个时刻:还原,构造和解构(Heidegger,1982年,第19-23页,第320-330页)。每种方法都将依次提出来,以其他方式指出“关于测量理论的历史和哲学工作可以突出与各种测量问题相关的进展,在某些情况下甚至缺乏进展”(Engelhard,第23页) )。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号