L. L. Thurstone (autobiography)
作者: L. L. Thurstone / 49128次阅读 时间: 2011年12月02日
来源: www.brocku.ca
www.psychspace.com心理学空间网心理学空间 ?~3GE*[!z

Return to Chicago

y8vc5J Vg0

It was in the summer of 1924 that Thelma Gwinn and I were married and we returned to Chicago where I had been appointed an associate professor of psychology. (At that time, and several years later, we had the opportunity to go to Berkeley, California.) Both Thelma and I had been graduate students at Chicago and we were thrilled to return there. Since I had been teaching statistics at Carnegie, I volunteered to give such a course at Chicago. Professor Carr was willing for students in psychology to take a one-quarter course in descriptive statistics if they wanted it. Although this course was a novelty in the department at Chicago, it was not important心理学空间|e8J;h d QL$S:WH


(304) work. My main attention went to the teaching of mental test theory. In all of the American colleges this subject was taught mainly from the various authors' manuals, and practically all such courses were confined to detail of the Stanford-Binet test. Neither instructors nor students seemed to have any interest in the theory of this subject, and this circumstance was probably responsible for the low prestige of mental test work. I decided to make some contribution toward improving this situation, and I now had the definite objective to start work on fundamental problems in psychological measurement. Most of my previous work had been concerned with descriptive and applied aspects of psychological measurement.心理学空间*j6l+sx.b _^5S

There was general discussion about the normality of the distribution of intelligence at point age and I investigated the application of this assumption to various educational scales that had been constructed. In the early educational scales it was assumed, in effect, that the distribution of any educational test was the same for young children as for educated adults and that they differed only in the mean. Turning to the description of general intelligence, I assumed two parameters for each age-group, namely, the mean and a measure of dispersion. Applying this idea, a scaling method for psychological tests was developed and this was my first paper on the theory of psychological measurement.[5]I regard that paper as one of my best.心理学空间j]f;QXp lnw"u

The next problem was to examine the mental-age concept which had previously been criticized by Otis and others. In another paper[6]I described the logical difficulties of the mental-age concept. In scoring the test performance of a child there is always some uncertainty as to whether the child is failing in a test item or whether he is merely distracted. In an attempt to minimize this source of error in the total score, I wrote a paper proposing that the score should be a scale value which is exceeded by as many successes as there are failures below it.[7]Interesting things are often discovered accidentally. At one time I asked my research assistant, Annette McBroom (Wiley), to plot two curves for some psychological test data, namely, the relations between mean-test performance against age and the dispersion against age. Both of these were determined first by scaling. Although I had not asked for it, she also plotted the relation between the mean-test performance and the standard deviation for each age after these values had been obtained by scaling. I then noticed that the relation was linear for the successive ages. Capitalizing on this simple relation, I located a rational origin for the scale of intelligence. This was done by extrapolating the linear relation until it reached a base line of zero dispersion. I reasoned that if we locate a point on a scale at which variability of test performance vanishes,心理学空间F m&MT0q,~ kL


(305) then such a point ought to represent a rational origin because the dispersion cannot be negative. This idea is perhaps remotely analogous to some ideas in the kinetic theory of gases. I tried this procedure on a number of psychological tests that had been scaled, and I found that the age at which the rational origin is located turns out to be several months before birth. My neurological friends assured me that such a finding could be justified and a paper on this subject was published in 1928.[8]Next we turned attention to the problem of the mental growth curve. The special difficulty with this problem, in contrast with similar curves for physical growth, is that in psychology we had no metric for appraising intelligence. Since the scaling method provides such a metric and a test for its internal consistency, we decided to construct a mental growth curve by a scaling method and with a method of locating a rational origin. That material was published in 1929.[9]

k;a1qx;c!W0

Shortly after coming to the University of Chicago, I had an opportunity to join the staff of Dr. Herman Adler at the Institute for Juvenile Research on a part-time basis. That experience was profitable in many ways. My work with Dr. Adler was largely advisory on problems of personnel and research. It was at that time I discovered Richard Jenkins, a medical student, in one of my classes. I offered him a research assistantship at the Institute for Juvenile Research and he started to work on the problem of intelligence in relation to family size and birth order. His work was so outstanding that I made him a co-author of a monograph on that problem.[10]Dr. Jenkins was later director of the Institute. At that time I met Andrew W. Brown who joined the Institute staff. My work at the Institute was terminated when I was offered, through Professor Charles Merriam, a promotion to a full professorship at the University of Chicago. It was a curious circumstance that the promotion to a professorship at Chicago did not come through the department of psychology. Ever since my promotion to a professorship, our work has been in the Social Science building and we have had the friendly interest of our colleagues in sociology, political science, and economics. The Social Science Research Committee has given us several research grants and some space. I have especially appreciated that in all these relations Dean Ralph Tyler of the Social Science Division has been helpful and friendly to our research projects.心理学空间J9V3@k/oDf+f{'v(_

Since there was no textbook on the theory of mental tests, I assembled a lithoprinted booklet on the reliability and validity of tests,[11]which was useful for teaching. Most of the material was drawn from journal articles on statistics, including Spearman's early work on reliability. The pamphlet was心理学空间.H"z7} w#v b


(306) prepared for temporary use in teaching because of the complete absence of any textbook on mental test theory. Today, twenty years later, although that pamphlet has been out of print for many years, we have frequent inquiries for it. The reason for this circumstance is that until now there has not been any textbook on this important subject. It is difficult to understand why this should be the case, because all departments of psychology give instruction in psychological tests. I am rewriting that old pamphlet in the form of an elementary book on test theory, and fortunately Gulliksen of Princeton has written a rather complete treatise on this subject which has just been published.[12]The absence of any suitable teaching material for elementary courses in test theory may indicate a continued lack of interest in the principles of this subject. The curricula of psychology departments still have many courses of instruction in test theory, but I fear that most of them teach the student only how to give particular tests, especially the Rorschach which is now so much in vogue.

Fu*@5M v0

In 1925 I had some evening discussions with Dr. David Levy in regard to the Rorschach test which he was introducing in this country. We discussed the possibility of objectifying the scoring and the interpretation. I was interested by the proposal to undertake this study, but I decided to gamble my time on other problems in psychological measurement because I had in mind the scaling methods for tests and the rewriting of psychophysical logic. The original monograph by Rorschach is well worth reading, but few of his enthusiastic followers seem to have contributed anything of consequence to psychological theory and science. In psychological science there is now no group that is more cultish and superficial than the Rorschach followers, and yet they dominate a large section of clinical psychology.www.psychspace.com心理学空间网

1...3456789101112...13
«探索性因子分析法 89 塞斯顿 | Louis L. Thurstone
《89 塞斯顿 | Louis L. Thurstone》
LOUIS LEON THURSTONE1887-1955 BY J. P. GUILFORD»
查看全部回复