Jingle-jangle fallacies

Short description: Terminology leading to erroneous conclusions

Jingle-jangle fallacies are erroneous assumptions that either two different things are the same because they bear the same name (jingle fallacy); or two identical or almost identical things are different because they are labeled differently (jangle fallacy).[1][2][3] In research, a jangle fallacy is the inference that two measures (e.g., tests, scales) with different names measure different constructs. By comparison, a jingle fallacy is the assumption that two measures which are called by the same name capture the same construct.[4][5]

An example of the jangle fallacy can be found in tests designed to assess emotional intelligence. Some of these tests measure merely personality or regular IQ-tests.[6] An example of the jingle fallacy is that personality and values are sometimes conflated and treated as the same construct.[7] Jingle and jangle fallacies make it challenging to review literatures for meta-analysis. Machine learning tools have been created to discover relevant papers even when the same construct is named differently in different articles. [8]

## See also

* Construct validity

## References

1. ↑ Kelley, Truman Lee (1927). Interpretation of Educational Measurements. Yonkers-on-Hudson, N.Y.: World Book Company. pp. 62–65.
2. ↑ Roeser, Robert W.; Peck, Stephen C.; Nasir, Nailah Suad (2006). "Self and Identity Processes in School Motivation, Learning, and Achievement". in Alexander, Patricia k.; Winne, Philip H.. Handbook of Educational Psychology (2nd ed.). Mahwah, N.J.: Erlbaum. pp. 392–393. ISBN 978-0-8058-4937-0. https://books.google.com/books?id=iSixyjjdq4gC&pg=PA393.
3. ↑ Pedhazur, Elazar J.; Pedhazur Schmelkin, Liora (1991). Measurement, Design, and Analysis: An Integrated Approach. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum. p. 74. ISBN 978-0-89859-555-0. https://books.google.com/books?id=2Y1RXHYO9UUC&pg=PA74.
4. ↑ Corsini, Raymond J. (1991). The Dictionary of Psychology. New York: Routledge. pp. 513, 514. ISBN 978-1-58391-328-4. https://books.google.com/books?id=0uxnglHzYaoC&pg=PA513.
5. ↑ Marsh, Herbert W. (2007). "Physical Self-Concept and Sport". in Jowett, Sophia; Lavallee, David. Social Psychology in Sport. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. p. 168. ISBN 978-0-7360-5780-6. https://books.google.com/books?id=t6sx0cj3GUoC&pg=PA168.
6. ↑ Gignac, Gilles E. (2009). "Psychometrics and the Measurement of Emotional Intelligence". in Stough, Con; Saklofske, Donald H.; Parker, James D. A.. Assessing Emotional Intelligence: Theory, Research, and Applications. New York: Springer. p. 33. ISBN 978-0-387-88370-0. https://books.google.com/books?id=LHsoQUXiV5AC&pg=PA33.
7. ↑ Higgs, Malcolm; Scott, Lichtenstein (2010). "Exploring the 'Jingle Fallacy': a study of personality and values". Journal of General Management 36 (1): 43-61.
8. ↑ Larsen, Kai; Bong, Chih How (2016). "A Tool for Addressing Construct Identity in Literature Reviews and Meta-Analyses". MIS Quarterly 40 (3): 529-551.

## Further reading

* Marsh, Herbert W. (1994). "Sport Motivation Orientations: Beware of Jingle-Jangle Fallacies". Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology 16 (4): 365–380.

0.00

(0 votes)

Original source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jingle-jangle fallacies. Read more

|

Retrieved from "https://handwiki.org/wiki/index.php?title=Philosophy:Jingle-jangle_fallacies&oldid=2186093"