Objectivity

Introduction

‘Objectivity’ is an ambiguous term with many meanings, some of which do not even overlap. It refers to different kinds of entities and is used in various scientific disciplines. Even in psychological assessment, there are at least four different concepts of objectivity. The most important one is that of an evaluation criterion for psychological assessment instruments which stands on the same level as the two other criteria of reliability and validity. The generality of these criteria and their applicability to all assessment instruments beyond the more narrow class of psychological tests is an issue of much debate in psychological assessment.

Philosophical Notions of Objectivity

There are various notions of objectivity in philosophy. Gauker (1998) differentiates between the correspondence conception and the intersubjective conception of objectivity. The most important feature within the correspondence conception is mind-independence. An objective judgement is a judgement concerned with mind-independent facts which are as they are independent of what anybody may think them to be. Objectivity or objective truth in this sense is a matter of correspondence with what is out there, i.e. with a mind-independent reality. Within the intersubjective conception of objectivity, a judgement is objective if an evaluation of it as true or false may proceed without regard to the question whose judgement it is (Gauker, 1998: 161). An objective judgement in this sense expresses the consensus of rational discussants. For other notions of objectivity in philosophy see Bell (1992).

Notions of Objectivity in Psychology

Many uses of the term ‘objectivity’ in psychology are influenced by the philosophical notions of objectivity. The standard view of scientific truth in psychology heavily borrows from the correspondence conception of objectivity. Even opponents to this view, such as, for example, constructivists and constructionists (cf. Gergen, 1994), construe objectivity (of knowledge) as correspondence of the cognitive-social constructions with a reality that is independent of cognition. And adherents to the related systemic approach (cf. Schiepek, 1986) construe objectivity (of a theory) as a naive direct representation or description of reality. Both notions are very close to the correspondence conception of objectivity. If adherents to the systemic approach construe objectivity (of propositions) as independent from the conditions of observation, the feature of mind-independence becomes obvious. From a constructivist or constructionist point of [Page 630]view, the correspondence conception of objectivity is based upon an illusion. Objectivity in this sense is not attainable. This epistemological claim is transferred to the domain of psychological assessment and forms the basis on which the use of the concept of objectivity as an evaluation criterion for psychological assessment procedures is questioned (cf. Schiepek, 1986).

Notions of Objectivity in Psychological Assessment

Constructivists and constructionists tend to ignore that the correspondence conception of objectivity does not play a prominent role in psychological assessment. In this domain, the intersubjective conception is much more important. Of the four different notions of objectivity, which are in the centre of discussion in psychological assessment, none is based upon the correspondence conception. Which are these notions?

The most important one emerges from psychological testing (cf. Walsh & Betz, 1995). Within psychological testing, objectivity (of collected, scored, and/or interpreted diagnostic findings) is construed as an evaluation criterion of psychological measurements to be ensured by the standardization of conditions (of administration, scoring, and/or interpretation of an assessment procedure). This notion of objectivity is usually at stake if the issue of objectivity is discussed in psychological assessment, especially in debates between adherents to qualitative and quantitative approaches.

...