Page 29 - The Importance of Common Metrics for Advacing Social Science Theory and Research

The Importance of Common Metrics for Advancing Social Science Theory and Research: A Workshop Summary
http://www.nap.edu/catalog/13034.html

MEASUREMENT IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES 17

could make would be to map out the very different forms that pursuing
common metrics can take, depending on the state of the science and the
goals in play. She also said that it would be worthwhile for the workshop
to address how the different forms fit together and whether there are cases
in which insufficient attention to the value of common metrics is holding
back science.
Third, how does the social science community move from the successes
of the past to tackling new opportunities and challenges? She noted two
examples of metrics that have stood the test of time through very careful,
thoughtful revision. One is the definition of the meter, which was adopted
in 1791 and grounded in the physical sciences. The measure was revised at
least four times, and these revisions were driven by changes in the science
used to translate the definition of a meter into an actual metric. Another
example is the Duncan socioeconomic index, a measure that has been
extremely successful in advancing research on social mobility. It, too, has
required adaptation because of changes in the occupational structure itself
and because of changes in the labor force. Bachrach suggested that there
is the opportunity for developing flexible common measurement strategies
that can better keep up with the diversity of experience over time and ac-
commodate the diversity of experience that exists at any one point in time.
She asked whether there might be a way to tap into new technologies, new
scientific advances, to develop adaptive models of measurement that can
be widely used.
At NIH, Bachrach saw many instances of disciplinary divides obstruct-
ing the flow of knowledge about constructs and appropriate measurement
between the health sciences and the social sciences. She considered the
balkanization of disciplines as weakening links between science and mea-
surement because the development of measures used in one discipline may
benefit from science in another discipline. Thus, the movement toward
interdisciplinary research promises greater commonality of measurement.
She believes there has been progress in bridging these divides.
Robert Pollak (Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri) picked up
on a different sort of disciplinary divide by distinguishing between measure-
ment reports for their own sake and measurement for use in analysis. In
the latter case, he said, people ought to think about what the independent
variables and the dependent variable are. For example, with respect to out-
comes for children, one might be thinking about health or education out-
comes (e.g., highest grade completed, test scores), labor market outcomes,
or crime. He also cautioned that seemingly simple variables (such as marital
status) actually can be very complex. It has become conventional practice
to combine those who are cohabiting with those who are married, for
example. But Pollak raised additional questions, such as how one should
think about married couples who are not living together or who commute.

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.