Measurement in the social sciences: where C-OAR-SE delivers and where it does not

European Journal of Marketing

Volumn 50, Issue 11, 2016, Pages 1942-1952

  Salzberger, Thomas ^a   Sarstedt, Marko ^b,c   Diamantopoulos, Adamantios ^d  

^a VIENNA UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS   (Austria)

^b OTTO VON GUERICKE UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^c UNIVERSITY OF NEWCASTLE   (Australia)

^d UNIVERSITY OF VIENNA   (Austria)

Author keywords

C OAR SE; Content validity; Convergent validity; Predictive validity; Psychometrics

Indexed keywords

EID: 84999791284     PISSN: 03090566     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1108/EJM-10-2016-0547     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Andrich, D. (1988), Rasch Models for Measurement, Series: Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences, Sage University Paper No. 68, Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA.
2. Bergkvist, L. and Rossiter, J.R. (2007), “The predictive validity of multiple-item versus single-item measures of the same constructs”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 44 No. 2, pp. 175-184.
3. Bergkvist, L. and Rossiter, J.R. (2009), “Tailor-made single-item measures of doubly concrete constructs”, International Journal of Advertising, Vol. 28 No. 4, pp. 607-621.
4. Borsboom, D., Mellenbergh, G.J. and van Heerden, J. (2004), “The concept of validity”, Psychological Review, Vol. 111 No. 4, pp. 1061-1071.
5. Boshoff, C. and Theron, C. (2015), “Why you must use my C-OAR-SE method, by John Rossiter: review and commentary”, Australasian Marketing Journal, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 263-264.
6. Churchill, G.A. Jr. (1979), “A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 64-73.
7. Cronbach, L.J. (1951), “Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests”, Psychometrika, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 297-334.
8. Diamantopoulos, A. (2005), “The C-OAR-SE procedure for scale development in marketing: a comment”, International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 1-9.
9. Diamantopoulos, A., Sarstedt, M., Fuchs, C., Kaiser, S. and Wilczynski, P. (2012), “Guidelines for choosing between multi-item and single-item scales for construct measurement: a predictive validity perspective”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 40 No. 3, pp. 434-449.
10. Embretson, S.E. and Reise, S.P. (2000), Item Response Theory for Psychologists, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.
11. Finn, A. and Kayande, U. (2005), “How fine is C-OAR-SE? A generalizability theory perspective on Rossiter’s procedure”, International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 11-21.
12. Fombrun, C. (2007), “List of lists: a compilation of international corporate reputation ratings”, Corporate Reputation Review, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 144-153.
13. Hölder, O. (1901), “Die Axiome der quantität und die lehre vom mass”, Berichte über die Verhandlungen der Königlichen Sächsischen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Leipzig, Mathemathische-Physische Classe, Leipzig, Hirzel, Vol. 35, pp. 1-64.
14. Lord, F.M. and Novick, M.R. (Eds) (1968), Statistical Theories of Mental Test Scores, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
15. Luce, R.D. and Tukey, J.W. (1964), “Simultaneous conjoint measurement: a new type of fundamental measurement”, Journal of Mathematical Psychology, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 1-27.
16. Michell, J. (1990), An Introduction to the Logic of Psychological Measurement, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
17. Michell, J. (1997), “Quantitative science and the definition of measurement in psychology”, British Journal of Psychology, Vol. 88 No. 3, pp. 355-383.
18. Michell, J. (1999), Measurement in Psychology – A Critical History of a Methodological Concept, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA.
19. Michell, J. (2000), “Normal science, pathological science and psychometrics”, Theory & Psychology, Vol. 10 No. 5, pp. 639-667.
20. Michell, J. and Ernst, C. (1996), “The axioms of quantity and the theory of measurement: translated from part I of Otto Hölder’s German text ‘Die Axiome der Quantität und die Lehre vom Mass’”, Journal of Mathematical Psychology, Vol. 40 No. 3, pp. 235-252.
21. Michell, J. and Ernst, C. (1997), “The axioms of quantity and the theory of measurement: translated from part II of Otto Hölder’s German text ‘Die Axiome der Quantität und die Lehre vom Mass’”, Journal of Mathematical Psychology, Vol. 41 No. 4, pp. 345-356.
22. Nunnally, J.C. (1978), Psychometric Theory, 2nd ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, NJ.
23. Rasch, G. (1960), Probabilistic Models for Some Intelligence and Attainment Tests, Copenhagen: Danish Institute for Educational Research, Expanded Edition (1980) with Foreword and Afterword by B.D. Wright, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
24. Rigdon, E.E. (2012), “Rethinking partial least squares path modeling: in praise of simple methods”, Long Range Planning, Vol. 45 No. 5-6, pp. 341-358.
25. Rigdon, E.E., Preacher, K.J., Lee, N., Howell, R.D., Franke, G.R. and Borsboom, D. (2011), “Overcoming measurement dogma: a response to Rossiter”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 45 Nos 11/12, pp. 1589-1600.
26. Rossiter, J.R. (2002), “The C-OAR-SE procedure for scale development in marketing”, International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 305-335.
27. Rossiter, J.R. (2011), Measurement for the Social Sciences. The C-OAR-SE Method and Why it Must Replace Psychometrics, Springer, Berlin.
28. Rossiter, J.R. (2012), “A new C-OAR-SE-based content-valid and predictively valid measure that distinguishes brand love from brand liking”, Marketing Letters, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 905-916.
29. Rossiter, J.R. (2016a), “How to Use C-OAR-SE to Design Optimal Standard Measures”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 30 No. 11, p. 30.
30. Rossiter, J.R. (2016b), “Multiple-item vs single-item measures of A-ad and A-brand depend on C-OAR-SE theory and on attitude theory”, Wollongong, NSW, Unpublished manuscript.
31. Rust, J. and Golombok, S. (2009), Modern Psychometrics - The Science of Psychological Assessment, 3rd ed., Routlegde, Hove, East Sussex.
32. Salzberger, T. (2009), Measurement in Marketing Research - an Alternative Framework, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, Northampton, MA.
33. Salzberger, T. (2013), “Attempting measurement of psychological attributes”, Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 4 No. 75.
34. Sarstedt, M., Wilczynski, P. and Melewar, T. (2013), “Measuring reputation in global markets: a comparison of reputation measures’ convergent and criterion validities”, Journal of World Business, Vol. 48 No. 3, pp. 329-339.
35. Sarstedt, M., Diamantopoulos, A. and Salzberger, T. (2016a), “Should we use single items? Better not”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 69 No. 8, pp. 3199-3203.
36. Sarstedt, M., Diamantopoulos, A., Salzberger, T. and Baumgartner, P. (2016b), “Selecting single items to measure doubly-concrete constructs: a cautionary tale”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 69 No. 8, pp. 3159-3167.
37. Spearman, C. (1904), “The proof and measurement of association between two things”, The American Journal of Psychology, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 72-101.
38. Stevens, S.S. (1951), “Mathematics, measurement, and psychophysics”, in Stevens, S.S. (ed), Mathematics, Measurement, and Psychophysics, Wiley, New York, NY, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 1-49.