LISTSERV at the University of Georgia
Menubar Imagemap
Home Browse Manage Request Manuals Register
Previous messageNext messagePrevious in topicNext in topicPrevious by same authorNext by same authorPrevious page (October 2002)Back to main SPSSX-L pageJoin or leave SPSSX-L (or change settings)ReplyPost a new messageSearchProportional fontNon-proportional font
Date:         Wed, 30 Oct 2002 15:23:34 EST
Reply-To:     Rcarlstedt@aol.com
Sender:       "SPSSX(r) Discussion" <SPSSX-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
From:         Rcarlstedt@aol.com
Subject:      Correction for Attenuation
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"

Can one justify correcting for attenuation on the basis of the reliability of an outcome measure, that is, a criterion variable? For example, I would like to argue that correlations between select predictor variables (in this case personality and behavioral measures) are/could be greater than observed because said criterion measures did not necessarily reflect potent (meaningful) outcome measures (e.g., a global measure of performance).

I know correction for attenuation can be applied when the reliability of a predictor variable (i.e., reliability of a test instrument) is less than 1.0 (always the case of course). However, how would one justify (if at all) the application of this correction method based on the relaibility of a criterion/outcome measure. Otherwise is there an alternative when focusing on the reliability of an outcome/criterion measure?

Thanks in advance.

Roland A. Carlstedt, Ph.D.

______________________________________________________ Roland A. Carlstedt, Ph.D. Chairman, American Board of Sport Psychology* Assistant Psychologist and Staff Clinical Psychotherapist, Behavioral Associates of New York City, www.americanboardofsportpsychology.org +1 917-680-3994

* An American Psychological Association Approved Provider of Continuing Education for Psychologists


Back to: Top of message | Previous page | Main SPSSX-L page