The proxy of Dorian Gray: scientific realism, construct validation and the way forward

Author:

Rigdon Edward

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to clarify some of the representations regarding philosophy of science and statistical methods, which are contained in Cadogan and Lee (this issue). Design/methodology/approach This paper uses logical argument and a review of literature. Findings Rigdon’s (2012) approach to construct validation is entirely consistent with scientific realism, while the “realist variable framework” revives the empiricist reification of common factors found in Bagozzi’s (1984) Holistic Construal and throughout the early literature of structural equation modeling. Factor indeterminacy is a phenomenon that makes it impossible to equate common factors with conceptual variables. The future of marketing measurement is not in the historical error-centric framework but in a measurement framework centered around uncertainty. Research limitations/implications Researchers should avoid reification of common factors and recognize the validity gap between conceptual variables and empirical proxies, consistent with Rigdon (2012) and should move toward an uncertainty-centric approach to measurement. Practical implications Decision-makers need to acknowledge the difference between data and the underlying reality. Success or failure will be shaped by the reality, not by the data. Originality/value To the best of the author’s knowledge, this is the first paper seeking to clarify representations in Cadogan and Lee (this issue). This paper aims to save journal readers from being misled.

Publisher

Emerald

Subject

Marketing

Reference49 articles.

1. Pragmatism and philosophy of science: a critical survey;International Studies in the Philosophy of Science,2007

2. A prospectus for theory construction in marketing;Journal of Marketing,1984

3. Construct validity: a critique;The American Psychologist,1959

4. Model implied instrumental variables (MIIVs): an alternative orientation to structural equation modeling;Multivariate Behavioral Research,2019

Cited by 4 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3