Separating models, ideas, and data to avoid a paradox

Rejoinder to Humphry

K. Sijtsma, W.H.M. Emons

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

Abstract

This article is a rejoinder to Humphry’s (2013) comment on Sijtsma (2012). Sijtsma argued that the Rasch paradox does not exist but Humphry replies that the Rasch paradox can occur provided the measurement procedure is precise enough. The rejoinder argues that the debates about the Rasch paradox mingle properties of formal psychometric models, ideas about what people do when they respond to the items in a test, and the kind of data they produce. The three levels of formal models, ideas about response processes, and real data should be distinguished in order to prevent confusion. Then the conclusion remains that the Rasch paradox does not exist.
Keywords: debate on psychological measurement, Rasch paradox, theory as precursor for measurement
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)786-796
JournalTheory & Psychology
Volume23
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2013

Fingerprint

Paradox
Key Words
Psychometrics
Psychological
Response Processes
Confusion
Precursor

Cite this

Sijtsma, K. ; Emons, W.H.M. / Separating models, ideas, and data to avoid a paradox : Rejoinder to Humphry. In: Theory & Psychology. 2013 ; Vol. 23, No. 6. pp. 786-796.
@article{a73d624843054b74870ea462f4477815,
title = "Separating models, ideas, and data to avoid a paradox: Rejoinder to Humphry",
abstract = "This article is a rejoinder to Humphry’s (2013) comment on Sijtsma (2012). Sijtsma argued that the Rasch paradox does not exist but Humphry replies that the Rasch paradox can occur provided the measurement procedure is precise enough. The rejoinder argues that the debates about the Rasch paradox mingle properties of formal psychometric models, ideas about what people do when they respond to the items in a test, and the kind of data they produce. The three levels of formal models, ideas about response processes, and real data should be distinguished in order to prevent confusion. Then the conclusion remains that the Rasch paradox does not exist.Keywords: debate on psychological measurement, Rasch paradox, theory as precursor for measurement",
author = "K. Sijtsma and W.H.M. Emons",
year = "2013",
doi = "10.1177/0959354313503724",
language = "English",
volume = "23",
pages = "786--796",
journal = "Theory & Psychology",
issn = "0959-3543",
publisher = "Sage Publications Ltd",
number = "6",

}

Separating models, ideas, and data to avoid a paradox : Rejoinder to Humphry. / Sijtsma, K.; Emons, W.H.M.

In: Theory & Psychology, Vol. 23, No. 6, 2013, p. 786-796.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Separating models, ideas, and data to avoid a paradox

T2 - Rejoinder to Humphry

AU - Sijtsma, K.

AU - Emons, W.H.M.

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - This article is a rejoinder to Humphry’s (2013) comment on Sijtsma (2012). Sijtsma argued that the Rasch paradox does not exist but Humphry replies that the Rasch paradox can occur provided the measurement procedure is precise enough. The rejoinder argues that the debates about the Rasch paradox mingle properties of formal psychometric models, ideas about what people do when they respond to the items in a test, and the kind of data they produce. The three levels of formal models, ideas about response processes, and real data should be distinguished in order to prevent confusion. Then the conclusion remains that the Rasch paradox does not exist.Keywords: debate on psychological measurement, Rasch paradox, theory as precursor for measurement

AB - This article is a rejoinder to Humphry’s (2013) comment on Sijtsma (2012). Sijtsma argued that the Rasch paradox does not exist but Humphry replies that the Rasch paradox can occur provided the measurement procedure is precise enough. The rejoinder argues that the debates about the Rasch paradox mingle properties of formal psychometric models, ideas about what people do when they respond to the items in a test, and the kind of data they produce. The three levels of formal models, ideas about response processes, and real data should be distinguished in order to prevent confusion. Then the conclusion remains that the Rasch paradox does not exist.Keywords: debate on psychological measurement, Rasch paradox, theory as precursor for measurement

U2 - 10.1177/0959354313503724

DO - 10.1177/0959354313503724

M3 - Article

VL - 23

SP - 786

EP - 796

JO - Theory & Psychology

JF - Theory & Psychology

SN - 0959-3543

IS - 6

ER -