Representational measurement theory is the dominant theory of measurement within the philosophy of science; and the area in which the theory of conjoint measurement was developed. For many years it has been argued the Rasch model is conjoint measurement by several psychometricians. This paper critiques this argument from the perspective of representational measurement theory. It concludes that the Rasch model is not conjoint measurement as the model does not demonstrate the existence of a representation theorem between an empirical relational structure and a numerical relational structure. Psychologists seriously interested in investigating traits for quantitative structure should use the theory of conjoint measurement itself rather than the Rasch model. This is not to say, however, that empirical relationships between conjoint measurement and the Rasch model are precluded. The paper concludes by suggesting some relevant research avenues.
Adams, E.W. (1992). On the empirical status of measurement axioms: The case of subjective probability. In C.W. Savage & P. Erlich (Eds.), Philosophical and foundational issues in measurement theory (pp. 53—73). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
2.
Andrich, D. (1988). Rasch models for measurement. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
3.
Balzer, W. (1992). The structuralist view of measurement: An extension of received measurement theories. In C.W. Savage & P. Erlich (Eds.), Philosophical and foundational issues in measurement theory (pp. 93—117). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
4.
Barrett, P. (2003). Beyond psychometrics: Measurement, non-quantitative structure, and applied numerics. Journal of Managerial Psychology , 18, 421—439.
5.
Birnbaum, A. (1968). Some latent trait models and their use in inferring an examinee's ability. In F.M. Lord & M.R. Novick (Eds.), Statistical theories of mental test scores (pp. 395—479). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
6.
Bond, T., & Fox, C.H. (2001). Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
7.
Borsboom, D., & Mellenbergh, G.J. (2004). Why psychometrics is not pathological: A comment on Michell. Theory & Psychology , 14, 105—120.
8.
Borsboom, D., Mellenbergh, G., & van Heerden, J. (2003). The theoretical status of latent variables. Psychological Review, 110, 203—219.
9.
Brogden, H.E. (1977). The Rasch model, the law of comparative judgement and additive conjoint measurement. Psychometrika, 42, 631—634.
10.
Campbell, N.R. (1920). Physics, the elements. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
11.
Clark, S.A. (2000). The measurement of qualitative probability. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 44, 464—479.
12.
Cliff, N. (1992). Abstract measurement theory and the revolution that never happened. Psychological Science, 3, 186—190.
13.
Cohen, P.J. (1963). The independence of the continuum hypothesis, I. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 50, 1143—1148.
14.
Conder, M., & Slinko, A. (2004). A counterexample to Fishburn's conjecture on finite linear qualitative probability. Journal of Mathematical Psychology , 48, 425—431.
15.
Davis, P.J., & Hersh, R. (1981). The mathematical experience. New York: Penguin.
16.
de Finetti, B. (1964). Foresight: Its logical laws, its subjective sources . In H.E. Kyburg (Ed. and Trans.) & H.E. Smokler (Ed.), Studies in subjective probability (pp. 93—158). New York: Dover. (Original work published 1937)
17.
Ellis, J.L., & van den Wollenberg, A.L. (1993). Local homogeneity in latent trait models: A characterization of the homogeneous monotone IRT model . Psychometrika, 58, 417—429.
18.
Embretson, S.E., & Reise, S.P. (2000). Item response theory for psychologists. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
19.
Falmagne, J.C. (1979). On a class of probabilistic conjoint measurement models: Some diagnostic properties. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 19, 73—88.
20.
Fischer, G. (1995). Derivations of the Rasch model. In G. Fischer & I.W. Molenaar (Eds.), Rasch models: Foundations, recent developments, and applications (pp. 15—38). New York: Springer.
21.
Fishburn, P.C. (1996). Finite linear qualitative probability. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 40, 64—77.
22.
Fisher, W.P., Jr. (2003). Mathematics, measurement, metaphor and metaphysics II: Accounting for Galileo's `fateful omission'. Theory & Psychology, 13, 791—828.
23.
Fraenkel, A.A. (1976). Abstract set theory (Rev. 4th ed.; A. Levy, Ed.). Amsterdam: North Holland. (Original work published 1953)
24.
Gödel, K. (1986). Collected works. New York: Oxford University Press.
25.
Goldstein, H., & Wood, R. (1989). Five decades of item response modelling. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 42, 139—167.
26.
Green, K.E. (1986). Fundamental measurement: A review and application of additive conjoint measurement in educational testing. Journal of Experimental Education, 54(3), 141—147.
27.
Hersh, R. (1998). What is mathematics, really?London: Vintage.
28.
Iverson, G., & Falmagne, J.C. (1985). Statistical issues in measurement . Mathematical Social Sciences, 10, 131—153.
29.
Junker, B.W., & Sijtsma, K. (2001). Nonparametric item response theory in action: An overview of the special issue. Applied Psychological Measurement , 25, 211—220.
30.
Karabatsos, G. (2000). A critique of Rasch model fit statistics. Journal of Applied Measurement, 1, 152—176.
31.
Karabatsos, G. (2001). The Rasch model, additive conjoint measurement, and new models of probabilistic measurement theory. Journal of Applied Measurement, 2, 389—423.
32.
Karabatsos, G. (2003). Comparing the aberrant response detection performance of thirty-six person-fit statistics. Applied Measurement in Education, 16, 277—298.
33.
Karabatsos, G. (2005). The exchangeable multinomial model as an approach to testing deterministic axioms of choice and measurement. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 49, 51—69.
34.
Karabatsos, G. (2006). Bayesian nonparametric model selection and model testing. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 50, 123—148.
35.
Karabatsos, G., & Sheu, C. (2004). Order constrained Bayes inference for dichotomous models of unidimensional non-parametric IRT. Applied Psychological Measurement, 28, 110—125.
36.
Karabatsos, G., & Ulrich, J.R. (2002). Enumerating and testing conjoint measurement models . Mathematical Social Sciences, 43, 485—504.
37.
Keats, J.A. (1967). Test theory. Annual Review ofPsychology, 18, 217—238.
38.
Kline, P. (1998). The new psychometrics: Science, psychology and measurement. London: Routledge.
39.
Kraft, C.H., Pratt, R.D., & Seidenberg, A. (1959). Intuitive probability on finite sets. Annals of Mathematics and Statistics, 30, 780—786.
40.
Krantz, D.H., Luce, R.D., Suppes, P., & Tversky, A. (1971). Foundations of Measurement: Vol. I. Additive and polynomial representations. New York: Academic Press.
41.
Kyngdon, A. (2006). An empirical study into the theory of unidimensional unfolding. Journal of Applied Measurement, 7, 369—393.
42.
Lord, F.M. (1980). Applications of item response theory to practical testing problems. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
43.
Luce, R.D. (1967). Sufficient conditions for the existence of a finitely additive probability measure. Annals of Mathematical Statistics , 38, 780—786.
44.
Luce, R.D. (1971). Similar systems and dimensionally invariant laws . Philosophy of Science, 38, 157—169.
45.
Luce, R.D. (1978). Dimensionally invariant laws correspond to meaningful qualitative relations. Philosophy of Science, 45, 1—16.
46.
Luce, R.D. (1986). Uniqueness and homogeneity of ordered relational structures. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 30, 391—415.
Luce, R.D. (1997). Several unresolved conceptual problems of mathematical psychology. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 41, 79—87.
49.
Luce, R.D. (2005). Measurement analogies: Comparisons of behavioural and physical measures. Psychometrika, 70, 1—25.
50.
Luce, R.D., Krantz, D.H., Suppes, P., & Tversky, A. (1990). Foundations of Measurement: Vol. III. Representation, Axiomatization, and Invariance. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
51.
Luce, R.D., & Narens, L. (1992). Intrinsic Archimedeaness and the continuum. In C.W. Savage & P. Erlich (Eds.), Philosophical and foundational issues in measurement theory (pp. 15—38). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
52.
Luce, R.D., & Suppes, P. (2002). Representational measurement theory. In H. Pashler & J. Wixted (Eds.), Stevens' handbook of experimental psychology: Vol. 4. Methodology in experimental psychology (3rd ed., pp. 1—41). New York: Wiley.
53.
Luce, R.D., & Tukey, J.W. (1964). Simultaneous conjoint measurement: A new scale type of fundamental measurement. Journal of Mathematical Psychology , 1, 1—27.
54.
Maddy, P.J. (2001). Some naturalistic reflections on set theoretic method. Topoi, 20, 17—27.
55.
Marley, A.A.J., & Luce, R.D. (1998). A simple axiomatization of binary rank-dependent expected utility of gains (losses). Institute for Mathematical Behavioral Sciences Technical Report Series, MBS 98—27. Irvine, CA: Institute for Mathematical Behavioral Sciences .
56.
Michell, J. (2000). Normal science, pathological science and psychometrics . Theory & Psychology, 10, 639—667.
57.
Michell, J. (2003). Measurement: A beginner's guide. Journal of Applied Measurement,4, 298—308.
58.
Michell, J. (2004). Item response models, pathological science and the shape of error: Reply to Borsboom and Mellenbergh. Theory & Psychology, 14, 121—129.
59.
Michell, J., & Ernst, C. (1996). The axioms of quantity and the theory of measurement: Translated from Part I of Otto Hölder's German text of `Die Axiome der Quantität und die Lehre vom Mass'. Journal of Mathematical Psychology , 40, 235—252. (Original work published 1901)
60.
Michell, J., & Ernst, C. (1997). The axioms of quantity and the theory of measurement: Translated from Part II of Otto Hölder's German text of `Die Axiome der Quantität und die Lehre vom Mass'. Journal of Mathematical Psychology , 41, 345—356. (Original work published 1901)
61.
Moore, A.W. (2001). The infinite (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.
62.
Mundy, B. (1986). Embedding and uniqueness in relational theories of space. Synthese, 67, 383—390.
63.
Mundy, B. (1987a). The metaphysics of quantity. Philosophical Studies, 51, 29—54.
64.
Mundy, B. (1987b). Faithful representation, physical extensive measurement theory and Archimedean axioms. Synthese, 70, 373—400.
65.
Narens, L. (1985). Abstract measurement theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
66.
Narens, L. (2002). A meaningful justification for the representational theory of measurement. Journal of Mathematical Psychology , 46, 746—768.
67.
Narens, L., & Luce, R.D. (1993). Further comments on the `non-revolution' arising from axiomatic measurement theory. Psychological Science, 4, 127—130.
68.
Perline, R., Wright, B.D., & Wainer, H. (1979). The Rasch model as additive conjoint measurement . Applied Psychological Measurement, 3, 237—255.
69.
Ramsay, J.O. (1975). Review of Foundations of measurement, Volume I . Psychometrika, 40, 257—262.
70.
Ramsay, J.O. (1991). Reviews of Foundations of measurement, Volumes II and III. Psychometrika, 56, 355—358.
71.
Rasch, G. (1960). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Copenhagen: Danish Institute for Educational Research.
72.
Rasch, G. (1967). An informal report on a theory of objectivity in comparisons. In L.J.T. van der Kamp & C.A.J. Viek (Eds.), Measurement theory. Leiden: University of Leiden .
73.
Rasch, G. (1977). On specific objectivity: An attempt at formalizing the request for generality and validity of scientific statements. Danish Yearbook of Philosophy, 14, 58—94.
74.
Resnick, M. (1997). Mathematics as a science of patterns. New York: Oxford University Press.
75.
Roskam, E.E., & Jansen, P.G.W. (1984). A new derivation of the Rasch model. In E. Degreef & J. van Bruggenhaut (Eds.), Trends in mathematical psychology (pp. 293—307). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Schwager, K.W. (1991). The representational theory of measurement: An assessment. Psychological Bulletin, 110, 618—626.
78.
Scott, D. (1964). Measurement models and linear inequalities. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 1, 233—247.
79.
Shapiro, S. (1997). Philosophy of mathematics: Structure and ontology . New York: Oxford University Press .
80.
Stevens, S.S. (Ed.). (1951). Handbook of experimental psychology. New York: Wiley.
81.
Suppes, P., & Alechina, N. (1994). The definability of the qualitative independence of events in terms of extended indicator functions. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 38, 366—376.
82.
Suppes, P., Krantz, D.H., Luce, R.D., & Tversky, A. (1989). Foundations of measurement: Vol. II. Geometric, threshold, and probabilistic representations. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
83.
Swoyer, C. (1991). Structural representation and surrogative reasoning . Synthese, 87, 449—508.
84.
Takeuti, G., & Zaring, W.M. (1982). Introduction to axiomatic set theory (2nd ed.) New York: Springer Verlag.
85.
Wood, R. (1978). Fitting the Rasch model—a heady tale. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 31, 27—32.
Wright, B.D. (1999). Fundamental measurement for psychology. In S.E. Embretson & S.L. Hershberger (Eds.), The new rules of measurement: What every psychologist and educator should know (pp. 65—104). Hillsale, NJ: Erlbaum.
