An obtained relationship between two empirical variables may mean that (a) they both reflect the same theoretical construct or that (b) they reflect different constructs which are related. It is suggested that the demonstration of shifting, nonmonotonic, and/or asymmetric relationships provides evidence for rejecting hypothesis (a). Demonstrating that the variables are differentially related to a third variable, factor analysis, corrections for attenuation, and a multitrait-multimethod approach appear to be limited ways of generating information useful for choosing between hypotheses (a) and (b).
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Alker, H. A.Is Personality situationally specific or intrapsychically consistent. Journal of Personality , 1972, 40, 1-16.
2.
Bem, D. J.Constructing cross-situational consistencies in behavior: Some thoughts on Alker's critique of Mischel. Journal of Personality, 1972, 40, 17-26.
3.
Block, J.The equivalence of measures and the correction for attenuation. Psychological Bulletin, 1963, 60, 152-156.
4.
Campbell, D. T. and Fiske, D. W.Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 1959, 56, 81-105.
5.
Campbell, D. T. and Stanley, J. C.Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research . Chicago: Rand, 1963.
6.
Cronbach, L. J. and Meehl, P. E.Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 1955, 52, 281-302.
7.
Duncan, O. D.Some linear models for two-wave, two-variable panel analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 1969, 71, 74-80.
8.
Forsyth, R. A. and Feldt, L. S.An investigation of empirical sampling distribution of correlation coefficients corrected for attenuation. EDUCATIONAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL MEASUREMENT, 1969, 29, 61-72.
9.
Forsyth, R. A. and Feldt, L. S.Some theoretical and empirical results related to McNemar's test that the population correlation coefficient correlated for attenuation equals 1.0. American Educational Research Journal , 1970, 7, 197-207.
10.
Gulliksen, H.Methods for determining equivalence of measures. Psychological Bulletin, 1968, 70, 534-544.
11.
Lord, F. M.A significance test for the hypothesis that two variables measure the same trait except for errors of measurement . Psychometrika, 1957, 22, 2077-220.
12.
Lord, F. M.Testing if two measuring procedures measure the same dimension. Psychological Bulletin, 1973, 79, 71-72.
13.
McDonald, R. P.A general approach to nonlinear factor analysis. Psychometrika, 1962, 27, 397-415.
14.
McNemar, Q.Attenuation and interaction. Psychometrika, 1958, 23, 259-266.
15.
Mischel, W.Personality and assessment. New York: Wiley, 1968 .
16.
Mischel, W.Continuity and change in personality . American Psychologist, 1969, 23, 1012-1018.
17.
Rozelle, R. M. and Campbell, D. T.More plausible rival hypotheses in the cross-lagged panel correlation technique. Psychological Bulletin, 1969, 71, 74-80.
18.
Sandell, R. G.Note on choosing between competing interpretations of cross-lagged panel correlations. Psychological Bulletin, 1971, 75, 367-368.
19.
Saunders, D. R.Moderator variables in prediction . EDUCATIONAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL MEASUREMENT, 1956, 16, 209-222.
20.
Stephens, M. W. and Crowne, D. P.Correction for attentuation and the equivalence of tests. Psychological Bulletin, 1965, 210-213.
21.
Tucker, L.Some mathematical notes on three mode factor analysis. Psychometrika, 1966, 31, 279-311.
22.
Yee, A. H. and Gage, H. L.Techniques for estimating the source and direction of causal influence in panel data. Psychological Bulletin , 1968, 70, 115-126.
23.
Zedeck, S.Problems with the use of "moderator" variables. Psychological Bulletin, 1971, 76, 295-310.
