Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

An equal-level approach that yields new infor mation for the evaluation of multitrait-multimethod (MTMM) matrices is described. The procedure is based on the analysis of item-composite relations, composite-composite relations, composites, and facets. A main characteristic of the equal-level approach is the induction of equality in data-level prior to carrying out comparisons between coeffi cients, because in many cases such inequalities may lead to inaccurate conclusions. Methods are proposed for ensuring comparability of coefficients even if an MTMM design includes different numbers of items for traits and methods. The concept of dis aggregation is assigned a key position in the inves tigation of convergent and discriminant validity. In addition, measures are proposed for avoiding other distortions resulting from partial self-correlations.

Keywords

Index terms: disaggregated correlations equal-level approach multitrait-multimethod analysis partial self-correlations Spearman-Brown formula.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Althauser, R.P. , & Heberlein, T.A. (1970). Validity and the multitrait-multimethod matrix. In E. F. Borgatta & F. W. Bohrnstedt (Eds.), Sociological methodology (pp. 151-169). San Francisco : Jossey-Bass.

Boruch, R.F. , & Wolins, L. (1970). A procedure for estimation of trait, method, and error variance attributable to a measure Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30, 547-574.

Browne, M.W. (1984). The decomposition of multitrait-multimethod matrices British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology , 37, 1-21.

Campbell, D.T. , & Fiske, D.W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix Psychological Bulletin , 56, 81-105.

Cronbach, L.J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests Psychometrika, 16, 297-334.

Cudeck, R. (1988). Multiplicative models and MTMM matrices Journal of Educational Statistics, 13, 131-147.

Gulliksen, H. (1950). Theory of mental tests New York: Wiley & Sons.

Hubert, L.J. , & Baker, F.B. (1978). Analyzing the multitrait-multimethod matrix Multivariate Behavioral Research, 13, 179-184.

Hubert, L.J. , & Baker, F.B. (1979). A note on analyzing the multitrait-multimethod matrix: An application of a generalized proximity function comparison British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology , 32, 179-184.

10.

Jackson, D.N. (1969). Multimethod factor analysis in the evaluation of convergent and discriminant validity Psychological Bulletin, 72, 30-49.

11.

Jöreskog, K.G. (1971). Statistical analysis of sets of congeneric tests Psychometrika, 36, 106-133.

12.

Jöreskog, K.G. (1974). Analyzing psychological data by structural analysis of covariance matrices In R. C. Atkinson, D. H. Krantz, R. D. Luce, & P. Suppes (Eds.), Contemporary developments in mathematical psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 1-56). San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.

13.

Kelly, E.L. , & Fiske, D.W. (1951). The prediction of performance in clinical psychology Ann Arbor MI: University of Michigan Press.

14.

Levin, J. , Montag, I. , & Comrey, A.L. (1983). Comparison of multitrait-multimethod, factor, and smallest space analysis on personality scale data Psychological Reports, 53 , 591-596.

15.

Ray, M.L. , & Heeler, R.M. (1975). Analysis of techniques for exploratory use of the multitrait-multimethod matrix Educational and Psychological Measurement, 35, 255-265.

16.

Schmitt, N. , Coyle, B.W. , & Saari, B.B. (1977). A review of analyses of multitrait-multimethod matrices Multivariate Behavioral Research , 12, 447-478.

17.

Schmitt, N. , & Stults, D.M. (1986). Methodology review: Analysis of multitrait-multimethod matrices Applied Psychological Measurement , 10, 1-22.

18.

Schriesheim, C.A. (1981). Leniency effects on convergent and discriminant validity for grouped questionnaire items: A further investigation Educational and Psychological Measurement, 41, 1093-1099.

19.

Schweizer, K. (1987). Convergence, characteristic limit, and homogeneity of data as preconditions for the effect of aggregation in psychometric data . Archives of Psychology, 139, 133-142.

20.

Silver, N.G. , & Dunlap, W.P. (1987). Averaging correlation coefficients: Should Fisher's z transformation be used? Journal of Applied Psychology , 72, 146-148.

21.

Werts, C.E. , & Linn, R.L. (1970). Path analysis: Psychological examples Psychological Bulletin, 74 , 193-212.

An Equal-Level Approach to the Investigation of Multitrait-Multimethod Matrices

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References