True-dat

Now all I can think about is how would one blow smoke up their own ass.
Sure, I can imagine it. It’s not as if I lack imagination. However, I wonder whether it’s even possible at this point in my life when I feel back pain just getting out of bed?

2/2 🧵Regarding the effects of measurement error on regression coefficients to understand why this approach is problematic, we distinguish between four related regression models described on page 417 of Shear, B. R., & Zumbo, B. D. (2013) doi.org/10.1177/0013...

Congratulations! I look forward to reading it.

🧵 2/2 Key topics:
- historical analysis highlights explanation-focused;
- role of ethical and social values;
- measure-theoretic mental test theory;
- novel methodologies, ecological model of item and test performance;
- Third-generation DIF is not just about item bias.

And maybe, just maybe, in some (many) measurement settings one cannot recalibrate or rescale the problems away.

Psychometric math washing may not be the answer. It may add (dare I say) innumerable additional problems and misinterpretations.

It’s almost as if there is a moral basis to evaluation and measurement; and talk of a moral consequentialist stance. And, maybe this moral turn coincided with a recent social turn in phil of science? And this moral and social turn in measurement has changed how we think about validity? Who da thunk?

… and what does it mean to “correct” a score in this context?

… about the measurement process, the construct, and psychometric characteristics such as measurement error and dimensionality of the item data.
I would focus on the interpretation and use of the “adjusted” scores, which also involves close conceptual analysis of what it purports to measure …

The “adjustment” or “correction” should be described the public technical reports or manuals.
The adjust methods typically involve some form of re-calibration, re-scaling, or adjusted scoring so your intuition is spot on. There are various classes of methods for this that make strong assumptions

My recent manuscript included: “Alan Richardson is solely responsible for any remaining errors.”
Keep an eye out for it.

AI-driven what? Have they no shame?
I just felt part of brain shut down in protest of cerebral abuse. And that was the part of my brain that was working on breakfast plans. Thanks!

I’m onto you. Nudge me closer to the edge of madness, why don’t you?

Soon you’ll find me wearing a tin foil hat selling techno-eval gizmos out of the trunk of my car to help track your pillars of excellence.
You’ll hear a voice in the distance … “So, youse want dat median wit or witout waits?

Typically, I should be able to get a sense, even the bare essentials, of a survey and evaluation system in less than half that time.
This is troubling.

I spent two hours searching for details about Explorance’s survey methods and for any evidence of their claims regarding the validity (in technical sense) of their tools to no avail.
E.g., lots of slogans and marketing but I cannot find anything to support their claims about “metrics that matter.”

If a pigeon’s behavior can be shaped to peck at a button to guide a rocket, profs’ behavior can be shaped to ‘likes.’
The Skinnerian operant

Reply-all messages count as a publication.

Come to think of it, my largest readership is for my reply-all messages. ☹️