When researchers study something through the "lens" of some theory, what are they doing? They are investigating one property by studying another property that some theory (or more specifically, model) says is covariant with it. For example, we don't study pressure directly; we use an instrument, such as a barometer, which varies as pressure varies. That's fine for physical theories where we can easily trace a causal relationship between the two, but what about, say, mental phenomena? A person can feel 'under pressure', but we can see the signs - sweaty forehead, for example. How do we know what we are measuring even exists? Or as Mahmoud Jalloh puts the question, "what if my measurement process is measuring something other than the intended measurand?" How do we calibrate for error? Jalloh's discussion applies to high-pressure physics, and he argues that two theories can calibrate against each other if they are measuring across the same dimension (aka the principle of dimensional homogeneity). But what even are we measuring when we measure mental pressure? We have things like the perceived stress scale (PSS), but what values do the numbers represent? All food for thought. This is a dense technical paper that can be a difficult read, but the first half especially is valuable if you are deeply interested in the concept. Image: DALL-E 2.
Today: 0 Total: 313 [Direct link] [Share]
