Page 75 - 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

SOCIAL SCIENCE CONSTRUCTS 63

In the continuum between metric diversity and common metrics, the
concept of self-regulation is clearly in the direction of metric diversity. In
the literature, one finds most data generated by small-scale experiments and
2
three types of measures of self-regulation in use: rating scale measures,
personality inventories, and measures derived from behavior.
The advantages of rating scale measures include their focus specifically
on self-regulation and the frequent use of multiple subscales that allow for
fine-grained assessment of the construct. Personality inventories, generally
for adolescents and adults, were not originally designed to measure self-
regulation, but they often include subscales addressing it (conscientiousness
and constraint being two personality dimensions that are clearly relevant)
that are so widely used that normative data are typically available. Apart
from these normative comparisons, neither the rating scale measures nor
the personality inventories have inherent meaning. Both require self-reports
and are generally suitable only for adolescents and adults. Hoyle took issue
with the reliance on self-reports, given the evidence that people are poor at
reporting their own mental states, and the inability to track self-regulation
over the life course beginning at much earlier ages.
Measures derived from behavior are typically generated in small-scale
controlled experiments. Examples include duration of self-imposed delay,
control of emotional expression when exposed to emotion-invoking stimuli,
pain tolerance, and inhibition of interference. These measures offer a num-
ber of advantages, including their reliance on observable behavior (i.e.,
self-reports are not required) and the facts that situations can be devised
that generate scores even for young children, and that the metrics often
have inherent meaning (e.g., time, number of attempts). However, there
is no generally accepted paradigm, behaviors are likely to reflect other
constructs in addition to self-regulation, and there are no manipulation
checks. As a result, Hoyle stated, it is difficult to know whether a finding
should be attributed to self-regulation or to some other construct that one
has unwittingly manipulated.
Hoyle’s review of current measurement approaches indicates that there
is no existing measure that stands out as particularly promising for develop-
ing a standardized metric. Rather than “habitual measurement” and “se-
ductions of theory,” Hoyle saw the concept of self-regulation characterized
by ad hoc measures and “seductions of novelty.” Social psychologists gain
notoriety when they coin a new term or develop a measure that is somehow

2 Examples of rating scale measures include the Self-Regulation Questionnaire (“I am able
to accomplish goals I set for myself”), the Self-Control & Self-Management Scale (“I keep
focused on tasks I need to do even if I do not like them”), the Self-Control Schedule, the Good
& Poor Self-Control Scales, the Ego-Control/Ego-Resiliency Scales, the Self-Control Scale, and
the Self-Control Rating Scale.

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.