ArticlePsychometrika2024
Practical Implications of Sum Scores Being Psychometrics' Greatest Accomplishment.
Article in Psychometrika, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- From theory to practice: A comprehensive toolkit for Q-matrix validation in cognitive diagnosis.Behavior research methods · 2026Pooled it
- Beyond Jacobson and Truax: Estimation of Clinical Significance Trajectories in the Coping Power Intervention Using Measurement Error-Corrected Multilevel Modeling.Behavior therapy · 2025Trial
- Improving the comparability of momentary affect assessments and accounting for item-specific effects in within-person affect dynamics.Communications psychology · 2026Article
- Mitigating the slipping effect in polytomous scales: The Generalized Conditional Reliability Weighting (G-CRW) Algorithm and the WeightMyItems R package.Behavior research methods · 2026Article
- A primer on intensive longitudinal psychometrics.Behavior research methods · 2026Review
- Identification and Scaling of Latent Variables in Ordinal Factor Analysis.Psychometrika · 2026Article
- Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test Scores Demonstrate Poor Structural Properties in Nine Large Non-Clinical Samples.Assessment · 2026Article
- Latent trait or sum score: addressing measurement challenges in the prediction of self-rated symptom outcomes in psychological treatment.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Tobit modeling for dependent-sample t-tests and moderated regression with ceiling or floor data.Behavior research methods · 2025Article
- Effects of measurement errors on relationships between resting-state functional connectivity and psychological phenotypes.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- What you see is not what you get: Observed scale score comparisons misestimate true group differences.Behavior research methods · 2025Article
- The experience of fear and psychological distress among migrants in Spain.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Are Sum Scores a Great Accomplishment of Psychometrics or Intuitive Test Theory?Psychometrika · 2024Article
- Rejoinder to McNeish and Mislevy: What Does Psychological Measurement Require?Psychometrika · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper reflects on some practical implications of the excellent treatment of sum scoring and classical test theory (CTT) by Sijtsma et al. (Psychometrika 89(1):84-117, 2024). I have no major disagreements about the content they present and found it to be an informative clarification of the properties and possible extensions of CTT. In this paper, I focus on whether sum scores-despite their mathematical justification-are positioned to improve psychometric practice in empirical studies in psychology, education, and adjacent areas. First, I summarize recent reviews of psychometric practice in empirical studies, subsequent calls for greater psychometric transparency and validity, and how sum scores may or may not be positioned to adhere to such calls. Second, I consider limitations of sum scores for prediction, especially in the presence of common features like ordinal or Likert response scales, multidimensional constructs, and moderated or heterogeneous associations. Third, I review previous research outlining potential limitations of using sum scores as outcomes in subsequent analyses where rank ordering is not always sufficient to successfully characterize group differences or change over time. Fourth, I cover potential challenges for providing validity evidence for whether sum scores represent a single construct, particularly if one wishes to maintain minimal CTT assumptions. I conclude with thoughts about whether sum scores-even if mathematically justified-are positioned to improve psychometric practice in empirical studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39031300What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.