Quantitative research without measurement. Reinterpreting the better-than-average-effect

Established measurement practices have been criticized from various theoretical perspectives. The purpose of this article is to argue that quantitative research could be more defensible if contested assumptions about measurement were abandoned, and to illustrate this thesis with the example of the better-than-average-effect (BTAE). If research on the BTAE is conceptualized as an interpretive endeavor, one can provide arguments that do not rely on psychological measurement for the claim that the BTAE is evidence for self-delusion in people. I outline these arguments and elaborate them by discussing a typical study on the BTAE. Furthermore, I show how a measurement-free characterization of the BTAE reveals an important research gap and points to the specific scientific value of research on the BTAE. Finally, I offer three general suggestions for conducting future interpretive quantitative research: justifying why a quantitative method is suitable for investigating a certain phenomenon, providing a comprehensive interpretation of the numerical results, and exploring participants’ understanding of the study material.