Constructing psychological objects: The rhetoric of constructs.

Abstract

The concept 'construct' has been used to denote a large class of phenomena, including more classically defined traits (such as introversion and extroversion), clinical and diagnostic categories (e.g., psychopathy), cognitive functions (e.g., cognitive control, verbal memory), and more specific attitudinal and/or behavioral phenomena (ranging from "attitudes towards work schedules" to "pharmacists' care of migraineurs"). Moreover, how construct as a general category is characterized varies considerably, and constructs are often portrayed at the same time as theoretical concepts and the very phenomena designated by those theoretical concepts. In the present work, we draw on Michael Billig's descriptions of some of the implications of privileging a particular style of writing in social science discourse to provide a partial explanation as to why the constructed connotation of constructs (i.e., as theoretical concepts created by psychological researchers) has largely given sway to the reification of constructs (i.e., as objects under study) in the discourse of construct validation, and psychological discourse, more generally. We conclude by providing recommendations for psychological researchers regarding how to ward against ambiguous uses of the concept 'construct.'

Is grit relevant to well‐being and strengths? Evidence across the globe for separating perseverance of effort and consistency of interests

“…However, model fit indices can be used to accept or reject a model in isolation. 14 Exist is considered in an empirical sense of the word, not necessarily ontological, as we can never truly know if psychological constructs exist in reality (Slaney & Garcia, 2015). 15 Vallerand and colleagues' (2003) Passion scale contains two subscales: Harmonious and Obsessive Passion.…”

“… Exist is considered in an empirical sense of the word, not necessarily ontological, as we can never truly know if psychological constructs exist in reality (Slaney & Garcia, ).…”

Measurement in metrology, psychology and social sciences: data generation traceability and numerical traceability as basic methodological principles applicable across sciences

“…It contributes to the reification of constructs, ascribing to them an ontological status. The language used by construct developers further contributes to this reification and misleads scientists to overlook the constructed nature of constructs (Slaney and Garcia 2015), and thus also the necessity to clearly distinguish theoretical from operational construct definition.…”

“…This widespread equation of constructs with latent variables, however, is based on the erroneous equation of constructs and with the phenomena they are meant to represent (construct-referent conflation; Maraun and Gabriel 2013), which places the ontology of constructs into their operational definition. This fallacy, which occurs in psychometric and psychotechnical engineering alike (e.g., in Cronbach and Meehl 1955), blurs the nature of the relations between theoretically constructed concepts (constructs) and the phenomena they are intended to represent (their referents; Slaney and Garcia 2015). It may also have contributed to the misconception of construct operationalisation as constituting a step of measurement.…”

The EFPA Test-Review Model: When Good Intentions Meet a Methodological Thought Disorder

“…These articles dovetail with Maraun’s [ 3 ] earlier exposition of the flaw with the psychometric conceptions of construct validation. Very recently, Slaney and Garcia [ 28 ] have also exposed the flaws with common conceptualizations of construct validity theory, with a recent book by Slaney [ 29 ] exploring matters in more detail. The point here is that the EFPA guidelines concerning construct validation are now obsolete, and were shown to be obsolete as far back as 1998.…”