An Integrative Framework to Assess Trade-Offs and Implications of Choosing Measurements

Deciding how to measure critical social science concepts like inequality and democracy is one of the most consequential decisions researchers and policymakers make. Yet we lack concrete guidelines to recognize and weigh the tradeoffs that make going from concept to measurement such a challenging task. This paper builds on existing work on measurement validity and develops a framework that allows scholars to identify the trade-offs between three desirable properties of measurement: completeness, interpretability, and normative alignment. The first challenge results from the inherent trade-off between completeness and interpretability. The second challenge results from the lack of empirical tools to assess the normative implications of choosing one indicator over another one. To exemplify how to navigate these challenges, the paper engages with debates on how to measure democracy and inequality. The paper aims to guide scholars in the consequential task of choosing one indicator that matches their research goals as well as their normative orientations.