Ethnomethodology and the human sciences: Method: measurement – ordinary and scientific measurement as ethnomethodological phenomena
Ethnomethodology and the human sciences: Method: measurement – ordinary and scientific measurement as ethnomethodological phenomena
复制标题
民族方法论和人文科学:方法:测量——作为民族方法论现象的普通和科学测量
DOI:
10.1017/cbo9780511611827.006
复制
发表时间:
1991
影响因子:
3.8
通讯作者:
M. Lynch
中科院分区:
文献类型:
--
作者:
M. Lynch
Measurement in science traditionally is defined as an assignment of numbers (or, in some definitions, numerals) to fundamental attributes of an object or event studied (Kyburg 1984). Once such a correspondence between numbers and objective properties is established, the numbers can be manipulated via mathematical operations and the results assigned back to the measured phenomena. The classic conception of measurement can be elaborated to include the entire range of techniques through which geometric models mediate the interpretive relationship between theory and data:'Using a geometry, the abstract objects and events of physical theory are composed into models which give a picture of reality and which are used to connect theory by experimental and nonexperimental investigation to sense impressions'(Wilier, 1984: 243).This broadened definition of measurement comprehends a more complex array of practices than simply attaching numbers to objective attributes. The construction of an'interpreted diagram'or model articulates the relevancies under which theoretical expressions are brought into correspondence with empirical properties. A model's constituent symbols and imagery can enable progressive generalisation of a family of models for mapping and measuring diverse phenomena. Despite its emphasis on the dependence of models on theory, this definition retains the classic concept of measurement as a bringing together of symbolic imagery and'small bits of information which we receive from the world'(Wilier, 1984: 247). The idea that measurement is constructed (and its validity assessed) in terms of an inherent isomorphism between mathematical symbols and empirical data is widely assumed by social scientists. Even critics of measurement practices in the social sciences often avow that the natural sciences are blessed with