Strauss M E
Department of Psychology, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio 44106-7123, USA.
J Abnorm Psychol. 2001 Feb;110(1):6-14. doi: 10.1037//0021-843x.110.1.6.
Cognitive deficits associated with psychopathology often do not occur in isolation. Consequently, identifying a specific deficit in a disorder requires comparing the magnitude of group differences on theoretically relevant measures with those on control tasks measuring other constructs. L. J. Chapman and J. P. Chapman (1973) noted that common forms of such Group x Task interactions are theoretically ambiguous unless performance measures have comparable discriminating power. The principles of psychometric matching for discriminating power developed in the Chapmans' research program are reviewed, and both criticisms and alternative psychometric approaches are evaluated. Psychometric matching can be mindful of threats to the construct validity of measures and frequently remains methodologically necessary. Otherwise, interactions involving measures that vary in sensitivity to individual differences may be misinterpreted as evidence for specific deficits.
与精神病理学相关的认知缺陷往往并非孤立出现。因此，要确定一种疾病中的特定缺陷，需要将理论相关测量上的组间差异大小与测量其他结构的控制任务上的差异大小进行比较。L. J. 查普曼和J. P. 查普曼（1973年）指出，除非绩效测量具有可比的区分能力，否则这种组×任务交互作用的常见形式在理论上是模糊不清的。本文回顾了查普曼研究项目中为区分能力而发展的心理测量匹配原则，并对相关批评和替代心理测量方法进行了评估。心理测量匹配可以留意对测量结构效度的威胁，并且在方法上常常是必要的。否则，涉及对个体差异敏感度不同的测量的交互作用可能会被误解为特定缺陷的证据。
