Thorne F C
J Clin Psychol. 1978 Apr;34(2):283-301. doi: 10.1002/1097-4679(197804)34:2<283::aid-jclp2270340206>3.0.co;2-8.
Factor analytic research is still in its infancy--theoretically, methodologically, and interpretively. Definitive research has not yet been done on problems of (a) item design and selection of items suitable for factor analysis; (b) identification of highly significant marker items; (c) tracings of item response distributions across scales, populations, occasions and other relevant variables; (d) determination of the number of items with different loadings necessary to obtain valid scale scores for psychological state measurements; (e) questions about the validity of summating factorially heterogeneous lowly correlated items in arriving at scale scores; (f) the use of clinical judgment to evaluate the possibly differing significances of the same item responses across populations and occasions; i.e., does the same factored item response have the same significance across scales?; (g) how to interpret scales with factorially mixed item compositions; (h) clinical judgement decisions in evaluating and interpreting scale meanings; and (i) the comparison of the results of analyzing data by different scaling methods. This study makes a start toward clarifying these methodological issues by analyzing the results of applying different methods of scale construction that utilized 146,000 item responses made by 730 Ss on the Personal Health Survey, a 200-item inventory designed to measure organ system functioning that contributes to physical and mental health.
因素分析研究在理论、方法和解释方面仍处于起步阶段。对于以下问题尚未进行确定性研究：（a）项目设计以及选择适合因素分析的项目；（b）识别高度显著的标记项目；（c）追踪跨量表、人群、场合及其他相关变量的项目反应分布；（d）确定为获得心理状态测量的有效量表分数所需的具有不同载荷的项目数量；（e）关于将因素异质且低相关的项目相加得出量表分数的有效性问题；（f）运用临床判断来评估同一项目反应在不同人群和场合中可能存在的不同意义；即，同一个经因素分析的项目反应在不同量表上是否具有相同意义？；（g）如何解释具有因素混合项目构成的量表；（h）评估和解释量表意义时的临床判断决策；以及（i）不同量表构建方法分析数据结果的比较。本研究通过分析应用不同量表构建方法的结果，朝着澄清这些方法学问题迈出了第一步，这些方法利用了730名受试者在个人健康调查中做出的146,000条项目反应，该调查是一个旨在测量有助于身心健康的器官系统功能的200项问卷。
