Distinguishing Between Measurements and Dependent Variables

Abstract

Humphreys and Drasgow (1989b) recognize two types of dependent variables: the original measure- merits collected in an experiment and mathematical variables that are subjected to statistical analysis. Overall and Woodward (1975) were explicitly con cerned with the latter, whereas Humphreys and Dras gow contend that they were concerned with reliability of the original measurements from which difference scores may be computed. These are quite different matters. Criticisms should focus on points of disagree ment, and there has never been any disagreement con cerning the importance of reliability of the original measurements. The notion that treatment effects should be considered a part of the true variance for calculation of reliability estimates is rejected as stem ming from their failure to understand the basic differ ence between reliability and validity. Index terms: control of individual differences, difference scores, measurement of change, reliability of the marginal distribution, statistical power, within-group reliabili ties.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Humphreys, L.G. , & Drasgow, F. (1989a). Some comments on the relation between reliability and statistical power. Applied Psychological Measurement, 13, 419-425.

Humphreys, L.G. , & Drasgow, F. (1989b). Paradoxes, contradictions, and illusions. Applied Psychological Measurement, 13, 429-431.

Overall, J.E. (1989). Contradictions can never a paradox resolve. Applied Psychological Measurement, 13, 426-428.

Overall, J.E. , & Woodward, J.A. (1975). Unreliability of difference scores: A paradox for the measurement of change. Psychological Bulletin, 82, 85-86.

Overall, J.E. , & Woodward, J.A. (1976). Reassertion of the paradoxical power of tests of significance based on unreliable difference scores. Psychological Bulletin, 83, 776-777.