With what spectacles do we look at numbers? Considerations on the use and interpretation of measures in psychology

Authors

  • Pierluigi Zoccolotti Dipartimento di Psicologia, Sapienza Università di Roma, Italia. Corresponding author: pierluigi.zoccolotti@uniroma1.it
  • Leonardo Carlucci Dipartimento di Studi Umanistici. Lettere, Beni Culturali, Scienze della Formazione, Università di Foggia, Italia
  • Marialuisa Martelli Dipartimento di Psicologia, Sapienza Università di Roma, Italia
  • Chiara Valeria Marinelli Dipartimento di Studi Umanistici. Lettere, Beni Culturali, Scienze della Formazione, Università di Foggia, Italia

Keywords:

Psychological measurement, Reaction times, Probability, Performance, Diagnostic assessment

Abstract

Some general considerations about measures in psychology are presented regarding how clinicians and researchers represent them. In identifying the presence of a cognitive disorder through psychometric tests, we make choices regarding the structure of the measure, the statistics that allow us to identify the presence of deviance, and the probability values associated with these statistics. In doing so, we use ways of observing data which have been structured throughout school and university training. Using these “spectacles” (arithmetic, Gaussian and probabilistic) is somewhat necessary because the numbers derived from the tests cannot be interpreted without metric, statistical and probabilistic assumptions.  On the other hand, the tendency to view psychological measures with arithmetic glasses can create problems in understanding the real usability of tests in the case of psychological dimensions. In addition, the choice of which assumption to use from a probabilistic point of view is not indifferent to the result obtained (particularly in identifying pathological performance thresholds). Understanding the nature of the assumptions we use in these contexts can foster a better awareness of the value and limitations of psychometric observations in the assessment of developmental disorders.

 

doi:10.53240/2024topic2.033.001

References

Alberoni, F. (1962a). Contribution to the study of subjective probability. Part I. Journal of General Psychology, 66, 241-264. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221309.1962.9711840

Alberoni, F. (1962b). Contribution to the study of subjective probability: Prediction. Part II. Journal of General Psychology, 66, 265-285. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221309.1962.9711841

Andrich, D. (1978). A rating formulation for ordered response categories. Psychometrika, 43, 561-573.

Antonietti, A., Borgatti, R., & Giorgetti, M. (2022). Cambiare paradigma per i disturbi del neurosviluppo? Dalla ricerca alla pratica clinica [Eng. Trans. Changing paradigm for neurodevelopmental disorders? From research to clinical practice]. Ricerche di Psicologia, 45, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.3280/rip2022oa14921

Astle, D. E., Holmes, J., Kievit, R., & Gathercole, S. E. (2022). Annual Research Review: The transdiagnostic revolution in neurodevelopmental disorders. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 63(4), 397-417. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.13481

Barbaranelli, C., & Natali, N. (2005). I test psicologici. Teorie e modelli psicometrici [Eng. Trans. Psychological tests. Psychometric theories and models]. Roma: Carocci.

Bella-Fernández, M., Martin-Moratinos, M., Li, C., Wang, P., & Blasco-Fontecilla, H. (2023). Differences in ex-Gaussian parameters from response time distributions between individuals with and without attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder: A meta-analysis. Neuropsychology Review, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-023-09587-2

Capitani, E., e Laiacona, M. (1996). La valutazione quantitativa dei dati clinici e sperimentali in neuropsicologia (Eng. Trans. The quantitative evaluation of clinical and experimental data in neuropsychology). In F. Denes e L. Pizzamiglio (a cura di) Manuale di neuropsicologia [Eng. Trans. Neuropsychology Manual]. Bologna: Zanichelli.

Capitani, E., Laiacona, M., Barbarotto, R., & Cossa, F. M. (1999). How can we evaluate interference in attentional tests? A study based on bi-variate non-parametric tolerance limits. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 21(2), 216-228. https://doi.org/10.1076/jcen.21.2.216.934

Clark, L. A., Cuthbert, B., Lewis-Fernández, R., Narrow, W. E., & Reed, G. M. (2017). Three approaches to understanding and classifying mental disorder: ICD-11, DSM-5, and the National Institute of Mental Health’s Research Domain Criteria (RDoC). Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 18(2), 72-145. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100617727266

Coltheart, M., Rastle, K., Perry, C., Langdon, R., & Ziegler, J. (2001). DRC: a dual route cascaded model of visual word recognition and reading aloud. Psychological Review, 108(1), 204-256. https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-295X.108.1.204

Cowles, M., & Davis, C. (1982). On the Origins of the .05 Level of Statistical Significance. American Psychologist, 37, 553-558. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.37.5.553

Cuthbert, B. N. (2014). The RDoC framework: facilitating transition from ICD/DSM to dimensional approaches that integrate neuroscience and psychopathology World Psychiatry, 13, 28–35. https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20087

Fisher, R. A. (1925). Statistical Methods for Research Workers. Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd.

Feldman, L. B., O’Connor, P. A., & del Prado Martín, F. M. (2009). Early morphological processing is morphosemantic and not simply morpho-orthographic: A violation of form-then-meaning accounts of word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16, 684-691. https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.16.4.684

Giampaglia, G. (1990). Lo scaling unidimensionale nella ricerca sociale [Eng. Trans. Unidimensional scaling in social research]. Napoli: Liguori.

Giampaglia, G. (2002). I modelli di Rasch nella ricerca sociale: Teoria e applicazioni. [Eng. Trans. Rasch models in social research: Theory and applications]. Napoli: Liguori.

Gmehlin, D., Fuermaier, A. B., Walther, S., Debelak, R., Rentrop, M., Westermann, C., ... & Aschenbrenner, S. (2014). Intraindividual variability in inhibitory function in adults with ADHD–an ex-Gaussian approach. PloS one, 9(12), e112298. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0112298

Goodman, S. (2008). A dirty dozen: twelve p-value misconceptions. Seminars in Hematology, 45, 135-140. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.seminhematol.2008.04.003

Heider, F. (1958). Interpersonal relations. New York: Wiley.

Hendriks, A.W., & Kolk, H.H.J. (1997). Strategic control in developmental dyslexia. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 14(3), 321-366. https://doi.org/10.1080/026432997381510

Likert, R. (1932). A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of Psychology, 140, 5-55.

Marinelli, C., Horne, J., McGeown, S., Zoccolotti, P. and Martelli, M. (2014). Does the mean adequately represent reading performance? Evidence from a cross-linguistic study. Frontiers in Psychology (section: Language Sciences), 5:903. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00903

Morton, J., Frith, U. (1995). Causal Modeling: A Structural Approach to Developmental Psychopathology, in D. Cicchetti, D. J. Cohen (eds.), Developmental Psychopathology, vol. 1: Theory and Methods. New York: John Wiley & Sons, pp. 357-90.

Park, H. B., & Hyun, J. S. (2014). The ex-Gaussian analysis of reaction time distributions for cognitive experiments. Science of Emotion and Sensibility, 17(2), 63-76. http://dx.doi.org/10.14695/KJSOS.2014.17.2.63

Pennington, B. F. (2006). From single to multiple deficit models of developmental disorders. Cognition, 101, 385–413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2006.04.008

Peterson, C. R., & Beach, L. R. (1967). Man as an intuitive statistician. Psychological Bulletin, 68(1), 29-46. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0024722

Progetto LG-DSA-2018, Linea Guida per la gestione dei Disturbi Specifici di Ap- prendimento. Aggiornamento ed integrazioni. [Eng. Trans. Guideline for the management of Specific Learning Disorders. Update and additions]. Roma, novembre 2021. Approvato dal SNLG-ISS nel gennaio 2022. Scaricabile da: https://snlg.iss.it/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/LG-389-AIP_DSA.pdf (ultimo accesso agosto 2022).

Shallice, T. (1988). From Neuropsychology to Mental Structure. Oxford: Oxford University Press (versione italiana: Neuropsicologia e struttura della mente. Il Mulino, 1990).

Student [W. S. Gosset]. The probable error of a mean. Biometrika, 1908, 6, 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/6.1.1

Yap, M. J., Balota, D. A., Sibley, D. E., & Ratcliff, R. (2012). Individual differences in visual word recognition: Insights from the English Lexicon Project. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38(1), 53–79. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024177

Zoccolotti, P. and Caracciolo, B. (2002). Psychometric characteristics of attention tests in neuropsychological practice. In M. Leclercq and P. Zimmermann. (Editors) Applied Neuropsychology of Attention: Theory, Diagnosis, and Rehabilitation. London: Psychology Press, pp.152-185.

Downloads

Published

2024-05-16

How to Cite

Zoccolotti, P., Carlucci, L., Martelli, M., & Marinelli, C. V. (2024). With what spectacles do we look at numbers? Considerations on the use and interpretation of measures in psychology. TOPIC - Temi Di Psicologia dell’Ordine Degli Psicologi Della Campania, 3(2). Retrieved from https://topic.oprc.it/index.php/topic/article/view/81

Issue

Vol. 3 No. 2 (2024): TOPIC-Temi di Psicologia dell’Ordine degli Psicologi della Campania

Section

Psicologia generale

License

Copyright (c) 2024 TOPIC - Temi di Psicologia dell'Ordine degli Psicologi della Campania

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Per le condizioni di licenza consultare il sito: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.it