[论文解读] Constructed measures and causal inference: towards a new model of measurement for psychosocial constructs

Tyler J. VanderWeele|arXiv (Cornell University)|Jul 1, 2020

Cognitive and psychological constructs research被引用 61

一句话总结

论文认为反映性和形成性测量模型常常错误指定心理社会构念；提出对构造测量与结果之间关联的因果解释，并概述一个新的心理社会构念测量模型。

ABSTRACT

Psychosocial constructs can only be assessed indirectly, and measures are typically formed by a combination of indicators that are thought to relate to the construct. Reflective and formative measurement models offer different conceptualizations of the relation between the indicators and what is sometimes conceived of as a univariate latent variable supposed to correspond in some way to the construct. It is argued that the empirical implications of reflective and formative models will often be violated by data since the causally relevant constituents will generally be multivariate, not univariate. These empirical implications can be formally tested but factor analysis is not adequate to do so. It is argued that formative models misconstrue the relationship between the constructed measures and the underlying reality by which causal processes operate, but that reflective models misconstrue the nature of the underlying reality itself by typically presuming that the constituents of it that are causally efficacious are unidimensional. The ensuing problems arising from these misconstruals are discussed. A causal interpretation is proposed of associations between constructed measures and various outcomes that is applicable to both reflective and formative models and is applicable even if the usual assumptions of these models are violated. An outline for a new model of the process of measure construction is put forward. Discussion is given to the practical implications of these observations and proposals for the provision of definitions, the selection of items, item-by-item analyses, the construction of measures, and the interpretation of the associations of these measures with subsequent outcomes.

研究动机与目标

• 质疑反映性与形成性测量模型如何表示心理社会构念。
• 主张因果相关的组成要素是多变量的而非单变量。
• 提出对构造测量与结果之间关联的因果解释。
• 概述一个新的测量构建过程模型并讨论实际意义。

提出的方法

• 批判性比较反映性和形成性测量模型及其经验含义。
• 论证当数据反映多变量、因果相关的组成要素时，经验含义会被违反。
• 提出一个容纳模型违规的构造测量与结果之间关联的因果解释框架。
• 概述一个新的基于过程的测量构建模型。
• 讨论量表项选择、逐项分析，以及对测量-结果关联的解释。

实验结果

研究问题

• RQ1 反映性与形成性测量模型在心理社会构念上的局限性是什么？
• RQ2 在可能违反标准模型假设的情况下，应如何解释构造测量和结果之间的关联？
• RQ3 因果解释是否可以应用于反映性和形成性模型？
• RQ4 对心理社会构念，新的测量构建模型应是什么样子？

主要发现

• 反映性和形成性模型通常因为因果相关的组成要素通常是多变量而误导底层现实。
• 形式检验可以评估经验含义，但标准因子分析不足以完成此目的。
• 即使通常的模型假设被违反，对构造测量与结果之间关联的因果解释也可以适用。
• 提出一个新的测量过程模型，以指导定义、项选择以及对结果关联的解释。