Welcome to members of the Division of Quantitative and Qualitative Methods, and welcome visitors to our website. My name is Dave MacKinnon, and I am honored to be the 73rd president of Div. 5. As a member of Div. 5 for over thirty years, I have enjoyed the camaraderie and thoughtfulness of this group of talented researchers from many areas of methodology. Div. 5 members are devoted to the development and application of the best methods to increase scientific knowledge in psychology. Since Div. 5 was founded in 1944, the members have represented a who's who of methods in psychology. Many members are my personal heroes including early presidents such as Jane Loevinger, Paul Horst, Fred Lord and Lee Cronbach. Please see the complete list of past presidents. With the addition of our newest section, the Society for Qualitative Inquiry in Psychology, to the Assessment section and the Evaluation, Measurement and Statistics section, we represent all methods used in psychology. If you are a methodologist or a regular user of methods, Div. 5 is the place for you. If you are not already a member, please consider joining our division.
My interest in methods started when I took statistics from Fred Mosteller in 1977. I became hooked when I read a book for the course, Judith Tanur et al.'s (1972) "Statistics: A guide to the unknown." Here was a way to scientifically study complex topics, like psychology. I earned a PhD in measurement and psychometrics at UCLA and then worked at the University of Southern California's Institute for Prevention Research evaluating health promotion and disease prevention programs. I became fascinated by the development and evaluation of methods to extract the most information from research studies, especially randomized prevention and treatment studies. I started at Arizona State University in 1990 and for most of my career, I have focused on evaluating interventions and developing methods to understand the mediating mechanisms by which interventions achieve effects. The dissemination of new methods, especially methods that extract the most information from interventions, is a theme of my presidency.
Looking Back 50 Years to See Where We Are Now
Methods have come a long way since Div. 5 was founded in 1944. To get an idea of how methods have changed, I looked at psychological methods 50 years ago. In 1968, Philip Du Bois, a psychometrician, was president of Div. 5, representing the sustained focus of our division on assessment and measurement. Papers published in "Psychological Bulletin," a primary journal for psychological methods work in 1968, included articles by Jacob Cohen and Richard Darlington discussing the usefulness of regression analysis for grouped data, for studies with multiple predictors, and for identifying suppressor variables. Robert Linn described range restriction issues for measurement in self-selected groups. David Lykken's paper criticized statistical significance testing and encouraged replication studies. Other papers developed signal detection theory and models for decision-making. The use of computers was just beginning in 1968 and it has carried statistics on a wave that is yet to crest. Now, we can almost instantaneously conduct any analysis described in 1968. Methodologists have ridden the computing wave to develop a variety of methods impossible or unrealistic without computers such as the bootstrap and other resampling tests, advanced text analysis, exploratory analysis and Bayesian analysis.
In contrast to brilliant computational and technical developments, less dramatic changes have occurred surrounding the best methods to interpret research results. Lykken's criticisms of null hypothesis significance testing and his call for replication studies are as relevant today as they were 50 years ago. No amount of computing power can replace the importance of careful scientific thought. However, there are impressive developments in the interpretation of research results as well. Counterfactual-based causal inference provides a framework to understand, specify, and test psychological theory. Alternatives to null hypothesis significance testing including confidence interval estimation of effect sizes and Bayesian approaches are available. A grass roots effort is now underway to improve the validity of our research studies by sharing data, emphasizing replication studies, publishing hypotheses before research studies, and a general return to the openness that is a hallmark of science. Despite the growth in new methods and the increase in the ability to extract more useful and accurate information from data, new methods are still underutilized in psychological research. One goal of my presidency is to increase dissemination of new methods. In particular, I will focus on methods to extract the maximum amount of information from randomized treatment and prevention studies. A mini-conference in March and my presidential address in Chicago at APA's Annual Convention will focus on methods that extract more information from intervention studies.
Qualitative and Quantitative Methods
A recent accomplishment of Div. 5 has been the integration of qualitative inquiry in the division. This started with a vote of division members to include the new section, a vote to rename the division to the Division of Quantitative and Qualitative Methods, and now formalizing the change in revised bylaws that include the three sections of (1) Assessment, (2) Evaluation, Measurement and Statistics, and the (3) Society for Qualitative Inquiry in a dynamic division. It may seem challenging to combine quantitative psychology and its focus on numbers and statistical methods with qualitative psychology and its focus on deep understanding from comprehensive discursive investigation. There are many examples of integrating qualitative and quantitative methods that build on each area's strengths to form a unified approach. I encourage you to cross boundaries into other methodological areas of Div. 5. The challenges we face in psychology — such as suicide, opioid addiction and prejudice — are not simple. We need all of our methods to understand the science of their etiology, measurement, treatment and prevention.
Mini-Conference in March
Past President Scott Hofer established the inaugural Div. 5 mini-conference at the mid-year meeting in 2016. Joe Rodgers held a mini-conference on teaching statistics at Vanderbilt University in 2017 and Amy Schmidt held a conference on psychological measurement at the Educational Testing Service in 2018. In keeping with this tradition, we will hold a mid-year mini-conference in March 2019 at Arizona State University on advances in methodology in honor of Leona Aiken's extensive research on regression analysis, the development and evaluation of health interventions, teaching of quantitative psychology, and service to quantitative methods and Div. 5.
Summary
Div. 5 supports advancement of all methods in psychology. A goal for Div. 5 is the optimal consolidation of our three sections into a dynamic division that develops and applies the best methodological tools for psychological research. It is also important to continue to promote and communicate quantitative and qualitative methodology in APA, psychology in general and outside of psychology. Logical and rigorous methods may be more important now than ever, given challenges to the scientific method. The recruitment and retention of members is also important for a diverse, creative and successful division. Here are three things that you can do to help. First, you could ask one person who is not a member of Div. 5 to consider joining the division by sending them to our website. Second, you could look at one paper that is not in your direct area of methods, perhaps by reading an article in one of our three journals, "Qualitative Psychology," "Psychological Methods" and "Psychological Assessment." Finally, you can continue to develop accurate methods and strive to increase awareness of the best methods in psychology.
I hope you will report this work as part of our Div. 5 program next year in Chicago.
References
Tanur, J.M., Mosteller, F., Kruskal, W.H., Link, R.F., Pieters, R.S., & Rising, G.R. (eds.) (1972). Statistics: a Guide to the Unknown. Holden-Day: San Francisco.
Cohen, J. (1968). Multiple regression as a general data-analytic system. Psychological Bulletin, 70 (6), 426-443.
Darlington, R. B. (1968). Multiple regression in psychological research and practice. Psychological Bulletin, 69 (3), 161-182.
Linn, R. L., (1968). Range restriction problems in the use of self-selected groups for test validation. Psychological Bulletin, 69 (1), 69-73.
Lykken, D. T. (1968). Statistical significance in psychological research. Psychological Bulletin, 70 (3), 151-159.