Erik Angner has argued that simultaneous endorsement of the representational theory of measurement (RTM) and psychometrics leads to inconsistency. His claim rests on an implicit assumption: RTM and psychometrics are full-fledged approaches to measurement. I argue that RTM and psychometrics are only partial approaches that deal with different aspects of measurement, and that therefore simultaneous endorsement of the two is not inconsistent. The argument has implications for the improvement of measurement practices. The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: gratefully acknowledges research funding from the following institutions: Cambridge AHRC (Arts and Humanities Research Council) Doctoral Training Partnership; the British Society for the Philosophy of Science; Cambridge Commonwealth, European and International Trust; and Newnham College
