Measurement Best Practices

What is it about?

Measuring concepts that are not directly observable is an important aspect of scientific and practical research. Utilizing reflective (effect) indicators that change based upon changes in the unobserved concept has been the dominant measurement approach for decades. Causal-formative indicators, on the other hand, are a relatively new type of measurement indicator that affects, rather than is affected by, the unobserved concept. Despite the potential value of their implementation, methods scholars have raised significant questions about the appropriateness of their use. The expression of these concerns has led to a long-standing debate between scholars who support the use of causal-formative indicators and those who argue against their use. In this issue, Bollen and Diamantopoulos (2017), two leading methods scholars that support the use of causal-formative indicators, provide a comprehensive defense of their use. This article acknowledges the merits of their defense, while also raising important concerns related to the implementation of these indicators. Addressing these concerns leads to the development of six research questions requiring further investigation before the widespread adoption of these indicators. The research questions focus on concerns such as developing a better understanding of how causal-formative indicators handle measurement error, and the implications of their use on the process of building cumulative knowledge.

Featured Image

Why is it important?

Measurement has a profound impact on the validity of scientific findings.