New Coke, Rosetta Stones, and Functional Data Analysis: Recommendations for Developing and Validating New Measures of Depression

In this rejoinder, I outline 6 recommendations that may guide the continued development and validation of measures of depression. These are (a) articulate a formal theory of signs and symptoms; (b) differentiate complex theoretical goals from pragmatic evaluation needs; (c) invest heavily in new methods and analytic models; (d) calibrate all measures against a common set of items or indicators; (e) seek period expert consensus on theory, measures, and analytic models; and (f) establish a registry of scales and measures to facilitate knowledge exchange. With hundreds of measures now in existence, few of which are used routinely, and many of which have not been revised in decades, continued progress in the assessment of depression will depend on a clear differentiation of both scientific and evaluation goals, on our ability to utilize new methods and technologies systematically, and on our willingness to establish a common reference point for comparison. The invited commentaries are a welcome supplement to our efforts (Santor, Gregus, & Welch, this issue) to examine the characteristics of measures of depresMEASUREMENT, 4(3), 188–197 Copyright © 2006, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.