Department of Philosophy, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC 29208, USA.
Qual Life Res. 2013 Sep;22(7):1871-8. doi: 10.1007/s11136-012-0300-x. Epub 2012 Oct 28.
This paper brings a philosophical perspective to response shift research with the aim of raising new critical questions, clarifying some of the concepts employed, and providing a philosophical context within which to critically examine the assumptions that shape the field.
This critical analysis aims to reveal assumptions and clarify concepts and/or definitions that undergird methodological practice and theory.
We bring attention to the distinction of weak and strong evaluations, and the implications and consequences for construct validity and for designing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). We then consider the epistemology of PROMs, suggesting that they are better suited to a social constructivist approach than a scientific realist one. Finally, we examine the relationship between disability and response shift, arguing that in at least some cases, response shifts should not be understood as 'measurement bias'.
Our analysis reveals various concerns and further questions related to the role that substantive values play in the assessment of QoL. It also draws response shift into a wider arena, with broader issues of interpretation, self-evaluation, the meaning of the 'good life', and the status and legitimacy we accord to various scientific methods.
本文从哲学角度探讨反应转移研究，旨在提出新的批判性问题，澄清一些使用的概念，并提供一个哲学背景，以批判性地审视影响该领域的假设。
这项批判性分析旨在揭示假设并澄清概念和/或定义，这些概念和定义构成了方法实践和理论的基础。
我们提请注意弱评价和强评价的区别，以及对结构有效性和设计患者报告的结果测量（PROMs）的影响和后果。然后，我们考虑 PROMs 的认识论，表明它们更适合社会建构主义方法，而不是科学实在论方法。最后，我们考察了残疾和反应转移之间的关系，认为在某些情况下，反应转移不应被理解为“测量偏差”。
我们的分析揭示了与评估生活质量时实质性价值观所扮演的角色相关的各种关注和进一步的问题。它还将反应转移纳入更广泛的领域，涉及解释、自我评价、“美好生活”的意义以及我们赋予各种科学方法的地位和合法性等更广泛的问题。
