The theory of conjoint measurement was a genuine scientific revolution in measurement theory. For many years psychometricians and applied practitioners alike have contended that the Rasch model is a probabilistic version of this revolutionary theory. I disputed this claim from the perspective of representationalism. Michell's realist appraisal of the issue underscored the conclusions in my paper whilst Borsboom and Zand Scholten maintained that the Rasch model conceptually instantiates the theory of conjoint measurement. Nothing in either response refuted my conclusion. Nevertheless, relationships between the Rasch model and the theory of conjoint measurement remain an open research issue.
Borsboom, D. (2005). Measuring the mind: Conceptual issues in contemporary psychometrics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2.
Borsboom, D., & Zand Scholten, A. (2008). The Rasch model and conjoint measurement theory from the perspective of psychometrics. Theory &Psychology, 18, 111—117.
3.
Coombs, C.H. (1964). A theory of data. New York : Wiley.
4.
Doignon, J.P., Ducamp, A., & Falmagne, J.C. (1984). On realizable biorders and the biorder dimension of a relation. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 28, 73—109.
5.
Eagle, A. (2004). Twenty-one arguments against propensity analyses of probability. Erkenntnis, 60, 371—416.
Guttman, L. (1944). A basis for scaling qualitative data. American Sociological Review, 9, 139—150.
8.
Halliday, D., Resnick, R., & Walker, J. (1996). Fundamentals of physics (5th ed.). New York: Wiley.
9.
Humphreys, P. (1985). Why propensities cannot be probabilities. The Philosophical Review, 94, 557—570.
10.
Karabatsos, G. (2001). The Rasch model, additive conjoint measurement and new models of probabilistic measurement theory. Journal of Applied Measurement, 2, 389—423.
11.
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.
12.
Karabatsos, G. (2006). Bayesian nonparametric model selection and model testing. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 50, 123—148.
13.
Kyngdon, A. (2008). The Rasch model from the perspective of the representational theory of measurement. Theory & Psychology, 18, 89-109.
14.
Kyngdon, A., & Richards, B. (2007). Attitudes, order and quantity: Deterministic and direct probabilistic tests of unidimensional unfolding. Journal of Applied Measurement, 8, 1—34.
15.
Lord, F.M. (1952). A theory of test scores. Psychometric Monograph, 7. Chicago, IL: Psychometric Society .
16.
Luce, R.D., & Tukey, J.W. (1964). Simultaneous conjoint measurement: A new scale type of fundamental measurement. Journal of Mathematical Psychology , 1, 1—27.
17.
Michell, J. (1995). Further thoughts on realism, representationalism and the foundations of measurement theory. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 39, 243—247.
18.
Michell, J. (1999). Measurement in psychology: A critical history of a methodological concept. New York: Cambridge University Press.
19.
Michell, J. (2008). Conjoint measurement and the Rasch paradox: A response to Kyngdon. Theory & Psychology, 18, 119-124.
20.
Popper, K.R. (1959). The propensity interpretation of probability. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 10(37), 25—42.
21.
R Development Core Team. (2007). R: A language and environment for statistical computing [Computer software] . Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
22.
Rasch, G. (1960). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Copenhagen: Danish Institute for Educational Research.
23.
Scott, D. (1964). Measurement models and linear inequalities. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 1, 233—247.
24.
Skinner, B.F. (1987). Whatever happened to psychology as the science of behavior? American Psychologist, 42, 780—786.
