SearcharxivSearch

arXiv subjects

Roland M. Mueller

Publications and source records attributed to Roland M. Mueller.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

ALIGNS: Unlocking nomological networks in psychological measurement through a large language model

Psychological measurement is critical to many disciplines. Despite advances in measurement, building nomological networks, theoretical maps of how concepts and measures relate to establish validity, remains a challenge 70 years after Cronbach and Meehl proposed them as fundamental to validation. This limitation has practical consequences: clinical trials may fail to detect treatment effects, and public policy may target the wrong outcomes. We introduce Analysis of Latent Indicators to Generate Nomological Structures (ALIGNS), a large language model-based system trained with validated questionnaire measures. ALIGNS provides three comprehensive nomological networks containing over 550,000 indicators across psychology, medicine, social policy, and other fields. This represents the first application of large language models to solve a foundational problem in measurement validation. We report classification accuracy tests used to develop the model, as well as three evaluations. In the first evaluation, the widely used NIH PROMIS anxiety and depression instruments are shown to converge into a single dimension of emotional distress. The second evaluation examines child temperament measures and identifies four potential dimensions not captured by current frameworks, and questions one existing dimension. The third evaluation, an applicability check, engages expert psychometricians who assess the system's importance, accessibility, and suitability. ALIGNS is freely available at nomologicalnetwork.org, complementing traditional validation methods with large-scale nomological analysis.

cs.CL

Validity in Design Science

Researchers must ensure that the claims about the knowledge produced by their work are valid. However, validity is neither well-understood nor consistently established in design science, which involves the development and evaluation of artifacts (models, methods, instantiations, and theories) to solve problems. As a result, it is challenging to demonstrate and communicate the validity of knowledge claims about artifacts. This paper defines validity in design science and derives the Design Science Validity Framework and a process model for applying it. The framework comprises three high-level claim and validity types-criterion, causal, and context-as well as validity subtypes. The framework guides researchers in integrating validity considerations into projects employing design science and contributes to the growing body of research on design science methodology. It also provides a systematic way to articulate and validate the knowledge claims of design science projects. We apply the framework to examples from existing research and then use it to demonstrate the validity of knowledge claims about the framework itself.

cs.SE