Anna Alexandrova (King's College, Cambridge, Cambridge)
Often in the social sciences and policy world researchers wish to measure phenomena whose definition requires a value judgment, for example quality of life or wellbeing. Who should make this value judgment and how can measurement involve participants with relevant lived expertise? I report on joint work with Mark Fabian and a UK anti-poverty charity Turn2us to implement inclusive practices for measurement of thriving.
Alisa Bokulich (Boston University, Boston)
Although Charles Sanders Peirce is widely recognized as a central figure in the history of philosophy, what is lesser known is that his primary profession was as a geodesist who devoted his career to improving the precision and accuracy of gravity measurements (gravimetry). Gravimetry provides an excellent example of model-corrected measurement, or what more generally has been called model-data symbiosis. My aim in this talk is threefold: First, I examine Peirce's contributions to gravimetry and metrology. I argue that this is a critical but surprisingly unappreciated source for his pragmatic philosophy. Second, I show the consonance of Peirce's philosophical views with more recent work in the philosophy of metrology, especially related to the periodic adjustment of fundamental constants, and highlight a possible historical path of influence. Third, and finally, I show the continuing relevance of Peirce's philosophy of metrology & program of model-corrected gravity measurements to the recent redefinition of the kilogram.
Denny Borsboom (Universiteit van Amsterdam, Amsterdam)
Psychological measurement has traditionally been approached through the lens of psychometric models: statistical structures that form a bridge between substantive psychological theory and empirical data. For most of the 20th century, the dominant model in psychometrics was the latent variable model, in which test scores can be viewed as effects of a latent psychological construct. However, in recent years, psychological constructs are increasingly interpreted in terms of networks of interacting beliefs, abilities, affect states, and behaviors; such conceptualizations have taken a high flight in psychopathology research, but are also on the rise in research on attitudes, intelligence, and personality. From this perspective, a psychological construct is not seen as a latent variable that underlies or determines observable behaviors, but as a property that emerges from the interaction between network components. A novel psychometric modeling tradition associated with this idea has developed new statistical structures to serve as a bridge between network theory and data: network psychometrics. In the present talk, I will explain how network psychometrics relates to traditional psychometric perspectives and how it changes some pivotal elements in thinking about psychological measurement.