Lifelong learning in the professions: Differences between psychologists, educational scientists and managers. A comparison of three modelling techniques, using one database

Abstract

Two issues determine the quality and legitimacy of research: content and method. If the complexity of a research object increases, reviewers of a research report may fall short in evaluating the scientific or social contribution of the study. The same is true for the researchers who are involved. Many researchers are worried that alternative or new methods may scare off reviewers. Hence, groups of researchers configure into communities of practice (COPs) or schools of thought, using predetermined, specific sets of methods to validate their research instruments. Methods that are common within the COP, but criticized by methodologists and researchers in other domains. In the end the idea prevails that methods are arbitrary, and do not affect the research findings. In this symposium it is investigated whether the latter is true by comparing three well known modeling methods. The central research question is: “Which factors affect Lifelong Learning in the psychology, educational science, and business administration domain”?, and “Do these professionals differ in their Lifelong Learning strategies”? It is studied to which degree the three methods (the Rasch rating scale model; confirmatory factor analysis, and exploratory factor analysis) affect the results of statistics analyses. One database is used by three independent analysts, each using one of the three methods.