What Are Constructs? Ontological Nature, Epistemological Challenges, Theoretical Foundations and Key Sources of Misunderstandings and Confusions

References

• Altmann, G. T. M. (2002). Psycholinguistics. Critical concepts in psychology (Vols 1–6). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Arnulf, J. K. (2020). Wittgenstein’s revenge: how semantic algorithms can help survey research escape Smedslund’s labyrinth. In T. G. Lindstad, E. Stänicke, & J. Valsiner (Eds.), Respect for Thought (pp. 285–307). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-43066-5_17
   Google Scholar
• Arnulf, J. K., Larsen, K. R., Martinsen, Ø. L., & Bong, C. H. (2014). Predicting survey responses: How and why semantics shape survey statistics on organizational behaviour. PloS One, 9(9), e106361. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0106361
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arnulf, J. K., Larsen, K. R., Martinsen, Ø. L., & Nimon, K. F. (2021). Editorial: Semantic algorithms in the assessment of attitudes and personality. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 720559. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.720559
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arnulf, J. K., Nimon, K. F., Larsen, K. R., Hovland, C. V., & Arnesen, M. (2020). The priest, the sex worker, and the CEO: Measuring motivation by job type. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1321. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01321
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ashworth, P. D. (2009). William James’s “psychologist’s fallacy” and contemporary human science research. International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-Being, 4(4), 195–206. https://doi.org/10.3109/17482620903223036
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bannister, D., & Fransella, F. (1980). Inquiring man: The psychology of personal constructs (2nd ed.) Penguin Books.
   Google Scholar
• Barrett, P. (2003). Beyond psychometrics: Measurement, non-quantitative structure, and applied numerics. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 18, 421–439. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940310484026
   Google Scholar
• Bhaskar, R., & Danermark, B. (2006). Metatheory, Interdisciplinarity and Disability Research: A Critical Realist Perspective. Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research, 8(4), 278–297. https://doi.org/10.1080/15017410600914329
   Google Scholar
• Bhaskar, R., & Simon, H. A. (1977). Problem solving in semantically rich domains: An example from engineering thermodynamics. Cognitive Science, 1(2), 193–215. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0102_3
   Google Scholar
• Borsboom, D. (2017). A network theory of mental disorders. World Psychiatry: official Journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA), 16(1), 5–13. https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20375
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brower, D. (1949). The problem of quantification in psychological science. Psychological Review, 56(6), 325–333. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0061802
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Byrne, D., & Callaghan, G. (2022). Complexity theory and the social sciences: The state of the art. (2nd ed.) Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003213574
   Google Scholar
• Cartwright, N., & Runhardt, R. (2014). Measurement. In N. Cartwright & E. Montuschi (Eds.), Philosophy of social science: A new introduction (pp. 265–287). Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cicourel, A. (1964). Method and measurement in sociology. The Free Press of Glencoe.
   Google Scholar
• Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52(4), 281–302. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0040957
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Danziger, K. (1985). The methodological imperative in psychology. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 15(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/004839318501500101
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Danziger, K., & Dzinas, K. (1997). How psychology got its variables. Canadian Psychology / Psychologie Canadienne, 38(1), 43–48. https://doi.org/10.1037/0708-5591.38.1.43
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deutscher, G. (2006). The Unfolding of Language: The Evolution of Mankind’s Greatest Invention. Arrow.
   Google Scholar
• Dewey, J. (1946). Peirce’s theory of linguistic signs, thought, and meaning. The Journal of Philosophy, 43(4), 85–95. https://doi.org/10.2307/2019493
   Google Scholar
• Edwards, J. R., & Bagozzi, R. P. (2000). On the nature and direction of relationships between constructs and measures. Psychological Methods, 5(2), 155–174. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.5.2.155
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Faye, J. (1999). Explanation explained. Synthese, 120(1), 61–75. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005258504182
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fleck, L. (1979). Genesis and development of a scientific fact (F. Bradley and T. J. Trenn, Transl.). University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gershenson, C., Aerts, D., & Edmonds, B., (Eds.). (2007). Philosophy and complexity. Worldviews, science and us. Singapore: World Scientific. http://www.worldscibooks.com/chaos/6372.html
   Google Scholar
• Guastello, S. J., Koopmans, M., & Pincus, D. (Eds.). (2009). Chaos and complexity in psychology: Theory of nonlinear dynamical systems. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Guyon, H., Kop, J.-L., Juhel, J., & Falissard, B. (2018). Measurement, ontology, and epistemology: Psychology needs pragmatism-realism. Theory & Psychology, 28(2), 149–171. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959354318761606
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanfstingl, B. (2019). Should we say goodbye to latent constructs to overcome replication crisis or should we take into account epistemological considerations? Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1949. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01949
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hartmann, N. (1964). Der Aufbau der realen Welt. Grundriss der allgemeinen Kategorienlehre [The structure of the real world. Outline of the general theory of categories] 1940 (3rd ed.) Walter de Gruyter.
   Google Scholar
• Hibberd, F. J. (2019). What is scientific definition? Journal of Mind and Behavior, 40(1), 29–52.
   Google Scholar
• James, W. (1890). Principles of Psychology (Vol. 1). Holt.
   Google Scholar
• Jamieson, M. K., Govaart, G. H., & Pownall, M. (2023). Reflexivity in quantitative research: A rationale and beginner’s guide. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 17(4), e12735. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12735
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaplan, A. (1998). The conduct of inquiry: Methodology for behavioural science. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Kelley, D., & Krueger, J. (1984). The psychology of abstraction. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 14(1), 43–67. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5914.1984.tb00487.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kelly, G. (1955). The psychology of personal constructs (Vol. 1 and 2). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Kelly, G. (1963). A theory of personality: The psychology of personal constructs. W.W. Norton.
   Google Scholar
• Khanam, S. A., Liu, F., & Chen, Y.-P P. (2019). Comprehensive structured knowledge base system construction with natural language presentation. Human-Centric Computing and Information Sciences, 9(1), 23. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13673-019-0184-7
   Google Scholar
• Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Laucken, U. (1974). Naive Verhaltenstheorie [Naive theory of behaviour]. Klett.
   Google Scholar
• Lewin, K. (1936). Principles of topological psychology. McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Locke, J. (1999). An essay concerning human understanding. The Pennsylvania State University.
   Google Scholar
• Lundmann, L., & Villadsen, J. W. (2016). Qualitative variations in personality inventories: subjective understandings of items in a personality inventory. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 13(2), 166–187. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2015.1134737
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maher, B. (1969). Clinical psychology and personality: The selected papers of George Kelly. John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Maraun, M. D. (1998). Measurement as a normative practice: Implications of Wittgenstein’s philosophy for measurement in psychology. Theory & Psychology, 8(4), 435–461. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959354398084001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maraun, M. D., & Gabriel, S. M. (2013). Illegitimate concept equating in the partial fusion of construct validation theory and latent variable modeling. New Ideas in Psychology, 31(1), 32–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.newideapsych.2011.02.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maraun, M. D., Slaney, K. L., & Gabriel, S. M. (2009). The Augustinian methodological family of psychology. New Ideas in Psychology, 27(2), 148–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.newideapsych.2008.04.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mischel, W., & Shoda, Y. (1994). Personality psychology has two goals: Must it be two fields? Psychological Inquiry, 5(2), 156–158. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327965pli0502_15
   Google Scholar
• Molenaar, P. C. M. (2008). On the implications of the classical ergodic theorems: Analysis of developmental processes has to focus on intra-individual variation. Developmental Psychobiology, 50(1), 60–69. https://doi.org/10.1002/dev.20262
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Molenaar, P. C. M., & Campbell, C. G. (2009). The new person-specific paradigm in psychology. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18(2), 112–117. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2009.01619.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morin, E. (1992). Method: Towards a study of humankind. In The nature of nature. (J. L. Roland Belanger, Transl. and Introd.). Vol. 1. Peter Lang. (Originally published in French in 1977)
   Google Scholar
• Morin, E. (2008). On complexity. Hampton Press.
   Google Scholar
• Morin, E. (2023). The challenge of complexity: Essays by Edgar Morin (A. Heath-Carpentier, Ed.). Liverpool University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv3029jw9
   Google Scholar
• Neuman, Y., Turney, P., & Cohen, Y. (2012). How language enables abstraction: A study in computational cultural psychology. Integrative Psychological & Behavioral Science, 46(2), 129–145. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-011-9165-8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ogden, C. K., & Richards, I. A. (1923). The meaning of meaning: A study of the influence of language upon thought and of the science of symbolism. Harcourt, Brace & World.
   Google Scholar
• Peirce, C. S. (1958). Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. Vols. 1-6, C. Hartshorne & P. Weiss, (Eds.). Vols. 7–8, A.W. Burks (Ed.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pirnay-Dummer, P., Ifenthaler, D., & Seel, N. M. (2012). Semantic networks. In N. M. Seel (Ed.), Encyclopedia of the Sciences of Learning (pp. 3025–3029). Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1428-6_1933
   Google Scholar
• Poli, R. (2001). Foreword. Axiomathes, 12, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1017325129205
   Google Scholar
• Ramage, M., & Shipp, K. (2020). Systems thinkers (2nd ed.) Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Rød, J. (2004). Cartographic signs and arbitrariness. Cartographica: The International Journal for Geographic Information and Geovisualization, 39(4), 27–36. https://doi.org/10.3138/4462-2125-1312-217T
   Google Scholar
• Rosenbaum, P. J., & Valsiner, J. (2011). The un-making of a method: From rating scales to the study of psychological processes. Theory & Psychology, 21(1), 47–65. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959354309352913
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salvatore, S. (2019). Beyond the meaning given. The meaning as explanandum. Integrative Psychological & Behavioral Science, 53(4), 632–643. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-019-9472-z
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salvatore, S., & Valsiner, J. (2010). Between the general and the unique: Overcoming the nomothetic versus idiographic opposition. Theory & Psychology, 20(6), 817–833. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959354310381156
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shweder, R. A., Casagrande, J. B., Fiske, D. W., Greenstone, J. D., Heelas, P., & Lancy, D. F. (1977). Likeness and likelihood in everyday thought: Magical thinking in judgments about personality. Current Anthropology, 18(4), 637–658. https://doi.org/10.1086/201974
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slaney, K. L. (2017). Validating psychological constructs: Historical, philosophical, and practical dimensions. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-38523-9
   Google Scholar
• Slaney, K. L., & Garcia, D. A. (2015). Constructing psychological objects: The rhetoric of constructs. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 35(4), 244–259. https://doi.org/10.1037/teo0000025
   Google Scholar
• Smedslund, J. (2016). Practicing psychology without an empirical evidence-base: The bricoleur model. New Ideas in Psychology, 43, 50–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.newideapsych.2016.06.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tellegen, A. (1993). Folk concepts and psychological concepts of personality and personality disorder. Psychological Inquiry, 4(2), 122–130. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327965pli0402_12
   Google Scholar
• Thelen, E., & Smith, L. B. (2006). Dynamic Systems Theories. In R. M. Lerner & W. Damon (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Theoretical models of human development (pp. 258–312). John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Toomela, A. (2008). Variables in psychology: A critique of quantitative psychology. Integrative Psychological & Behavioral Science, 42(3), 245–265. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-008-9059-6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Torgerson, W. S. (1958). Theory and methods of scaling. Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Uher, J. (2011). Individual behavioral phenotypes: An integrative meta-theoretical framework. Why “behavioral syndromes” are not analogs of “personality. Developmental Psychobiology, 53(6), 521–548. https://doi.org/10.1002/dev.20544
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uher, J. (2013). Personality psychology: Lexical approaches, assessment methods, and trait concepts reveal only half of the story-Why it is time for a paradigm shift. Integrative Psychological & Behavioral Science, 47(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-013-9230-6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uher, J. (2015a). Conceiving “personality”: Psychologist’s challenges and basic fundamentals of the Transdisciplinary Philosophy-of-Science Paradigm for Research on Individuals. Integrative Psychological & Behavioral Science, 49(3), 398–458. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-014-9283-1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uher, J. (2015b). Agency enabled by the psyche: Explorations using the Transdisciplinary Philosophy-of-Science Paradigm for Research on Individuals. In C. W. Gruber, M. G. Clark, S. H. Klempe, & J. Valsiner (Eds.), Constraints of agency: Explorations of theory in everyday life. Annals of Theoretical Psychology (Vol. 12, pp. 177–228). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10130-9_13
   Google Scholar
• Uher, J. (2015b). Developing “personality” taxonomies: Metatheoretical and methodological rationales underlying selection approaches, methods of data generation and reduction principles. Integrative Psychological & Behavioral Science, 49(4), 531–589. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-014-9280-4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uher, J. (2016a). What is behaviour? And (when) is language behaviour? A metatheoretical definition. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 46(4), 475–501. https://doi.org/10.1111/jtsb.12104
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uher, J. (2016b). Exploring the workings of the Psyche: Metatheoretical and methodological foundations. In J. Valsiner, G. Marsico, N. Chaudhary, T. Sato, & V. Dazzani (Eds.), Psychology as the science of human being: The Yokohama Manifesto (pp. 299–324). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21094-0_18
   Google Scholar
• Uher, J. (2018a). Quantitative data from rating scales: An epistemological and methodological enquiry. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 2599. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02599
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uher, J. (2018b). Taxonomic models of individual differences: A guide to transdisciplinary approaches. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 373(1744), 20170171. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2017.0171
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uher, J. (2019). Data generation methods across the empirical sciences: differences in the study phenomena’s accessibility and the processes of data encoding. Quality & Quantity, 53(1), 221–246. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-018-0744-3
   Google Scholar
• Uher, J. (2020a). Measurement in metrology, psychology and social sciences: data generation traceability and numerical traceability as basic methodological principles applicable across sciences. Quality & Quantity, 54(3), 975–1004. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-020-00970-2
   Google Scholar
• Uher, J. (2020b). Human uniqueness explored from the uniquely human perspective: Epistemological and methodological challenges. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 50(1), 20–24. https://doi.org/10.1111/jtsb.12232
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uher, J. (2021a). Quantitative psychology under scrutiny: Measurement requires not result-dependent but traceable data generation. Personality and Individual Differences, 170, 110205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.110205
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uher, J. (2021b). Psychometrics is not measurement: Unraveling a fundamental misconception in quantitative psychology and the complex network of its underlying fallacies. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 41(1), 58–84. https://doi.org/10.1037/teo0000176
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uher, J. (2021c). Problematic research practices in psychology: Misconceptions about data collection entail serious fallacies in data analysis. Theory & Psychology, 31(3), 411–416. https://doi.org/10.1177/09593543211014963
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uher, J. (2021d). Psychology’s status as a science: Peculiarities and intrinsic challenges. Moving beyond its current deadlock towards conceptual integration. Integrative Psychological & Behavioral Science, 55(1), 212–224. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-020-09545-0
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uher, J. (2022a). Rating scales institutionalise a network of logical errors and conceptual problems in research practices: A rigorous analysis showing ways to tackle psychology’s crises. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 1009893. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1009893
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uher, J. (2022b). Functions of units, scales and quantitative data: Fundamental differences in numerical traceability between sciences. Quality & Quantity, 56(4), 2519–2548. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-021-01215-6
   Google Scholar
• Uher, J. (2023). What’s wrong with rating scales? Psychology’s replication and confidence crisis cannot be solved without transparency in data generation. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 17(5), e12740. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12740
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uher, J. (2024). Overcoming method-centrism: A transdisciplinary innovation. Springer. https://link.springer.com/book/9783031444272
   Google Scholar
• Uher, J., & Visalberghi, E. (2016). Observations versus assessments of personality: A five-method multi-species study reveals numerous biases in ratings and methodological limitations of standardised assessments. Journal of Research in Personality, 61, 61–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2016.02.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Valsiner, J. (2001). Process structure of semiotic mediation in human development. Human Development, 44(2-3), 84–97. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26763505 https://doi.org/10.1159/000057048
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Valsiner, J. (2014). Needed for cultural psychology: Methodology in a new key. Culture & Psychology, 20(1), 3–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354067X13515941
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Valsiner, J. (2017). Beyond the three snares: Implications of James’ ‘psychologist’s fallacy’ for 21st century science. New Ideas in Psychology, 46, 26–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.newideapsych.2016.05.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Valsiner, J. (2021). General Human Psychology. Springer Nature Switzerland.
   Google Scholar
• Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and language. MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wagoner, B., & Valsiner, J. (2005). Rating tasks in psychology: From a static ontology to a dialogical synthesis of meaning. In A. Gülerce, I. Hofmeister, G. Saunders, & J. Kaye (Eds.), Contemporary Theorizing in Psychology : Global Perspectives (pp. 197–213). Captus.
   Google Scholar
• Witherington, D. C., Overton, W. F., Lickliter, R., Marshall, P. J., & Narvaez, D. (2018). Metatheory and the primacy of conceptual analysis in developmental science. Human Development, 61(3), 181–198. https://doi.org/10.1159/000490160
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whitehead, A. N. (1929). Process and reality. Harper.
   Google Scholar
• Winter, D. A., & Reed, N. (Eds.) (2016). The Wiley handbook of personal construct psychology. Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Wittgenstein, L. (1922). Tractatus logico-philosophicus. Kagan Paul.
   Google Scholar
• Zeman, J. J, The Hegeler Institute. (1982). Peirce on abstraction. The Monist, 65(2), 211–229. http://www.jstor.org/stable/27902748 https://doi.org/10.5840/monist198265210
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar