A review and psychometric evaluation of pregnancy-specific stress measures

Considerable evidence has accumulated on the association between pregnancy-specific stress and adverse birth outcomes with an increasing number of measures of pregnancy-specific stress being developed internationally. However, the introduction of these measures has not always been theoretically or psychometrically grounded, resulting in questions about the quality and direction of such research. This review summarizes evidence on the reliability and validity of pregnancy-specific stress measures identified between 1980 and October 2010. Fifteen pregnancy-specific stress measures were identified. Cronbach’s alpha coefficient ranged from 0.51–0.96 and predictive validity data on preterm birth were reported for five measures. Convergent validity data suggest that pregnancy-specific stress is related to, but distinct from, global stress. Findings from this review consolidate current knowledge on pregnancy-specific stress as a consistent predictor of premature birth. This review also advances awareness of the range of measures of pregnancy-specific stress and documents their strengths and limitations based on published reliability and validity data. Careful consideration needs to be given as to which measures to use in future research to maximize the development of stress theory in pregnancy and appropriate interventions for women who experience stress in pregnancy. An international, strategic collaboration is recommended to advance knowledge in this area of study.

How secure is a Newtonian paradigm for psychological and educational measurement?

From the early 1900s, some psychologists have attempted to establish their discipline as a quantitative science. In using quantitative methods to investigate their theories, they adopted their own special definition of measurement of attributes such as cognitive abilities, as though they were quantities of the type encountered in Newtonian science. Joel Michell has presented a carefully reasoned argument that psychological attributes lack additivity, and therefore cannot be quantities in the same way as the attributes of classical Newtonian physics. In the early decades of the 20th century, quantum theory superseded Newtonian mechanics as the best model of physical reality. This paper gives a brief, critical overview of the evolution of current measurement practices in psychology, and suggests the need for a transition from a Newtonian to a quantum theoretical paradigm for psychological measurement. Finally, a case study is presented that considers the implications of a quantum theoretical model for educational measurement. In particular, it is argued that, since the OECD’s Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) is predicated on a Newtonian conception of measurement, this may constrain the extent to which it can make accurate comparisons of the achievements of different education systems.