Referential skill or construct system development: Testing alternative explanations for role category questionnaire‐based measures

Abstract

While constructivists assert that RCQ‐based indicators reflect differences in construct system development, this essay tests the claim that these indicators reflect variation in referential communication skill instead. Study one compared the constructivist claim that RCQ responses are spontaneous and natural with the contrasting claim that these responses are intentional and other‐directed referential messages. After completing the RCQ participants answered questions about their behavior. Results confirmed the expectation that participants would view their responses as intentional, referential communication directed towards a particular type of recipient. Study two compared the constructivist claim that there should be no relationship between the number of abstract descriptors and a measure of verbal efficiency (words per descriptor) with the expectation derived from referential communication research that greater skill should be reflected by more appropriate descriptors and more verbal efficiency. The correlation of ‐.56 between number of abstract descriptors and words per descriptor was only compatible with the referential skill‐interpretation. Together these studies further challenge constructivist interpretations of RCQ‐based scores and provide support for the alternative claim that these scores reflect differences in referential communication skill instead.