In early intervention, researchers often are interested in interpretation aids that can help determine the relative importance of variables when multiple regression models are used, and that facilitate deeper insight into prediction dynamics. Commonality analysis is one approach for helping researchers understand the contributions independent or predictor variables make in a given regression model. The purposes of the present paper are to (a) provide a general overview of multiple regression analysis and its application in early intervention research, (b) explain how to conduct a commonality analysis, and (c) illustrate how commonality analysis might be used as an interpretation aid in an early intervention research context.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Beaton, A.E. (1973). Commonality. Princeton, NJ : Educational Testing Service. ( ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 111829)
2.
Cliff, N. (1987). Analyzing multivariate data. San Diego: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
3.
Cohen, J. (1994). The Earth is round (p < .05). American Psychologist, 49, 997-1003.
4.
Courville, T., & Thompson, B. (2001). Use of structure coefficients in published multiple regression articles: β is not enough. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 61, 229-248.
5.
Cronbach, L.J. (1957). The two disciplines of scientific psychology. American Psychologist, 12, 671-684.
6.
Frederick, B.N. (1999). Partitioning variance in the multivariate case: A step-by-step guide to canonical commonality analysis. In B. Thompson (Ed.), Advances in social science methodology (Vol. 5, pp. 305-318). Stamford, CT: JAI Press.
7.
Hester, Y.C. (2000). An analysis of the use and misuse of ANOVA. (Doctoral dissertation, Texas A&M University, 2000). Dissertation Abstracts International, 61, 4332A.
8.
Holzinger, K.J., & Swineford, F. (1939). A study in factor analysis: The stability of a bi-factor solution (No. 48). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
9.
Horst, P. (1966). Psychological measurement and prediction. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
10.
Huberty, C. (1989). Problems with stepwise methods-better alternatives . In B. Thompson (Ed.) , Advances in social science methodology (Vol. 1, pp. 43-70). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
11.
Huberty, C. (1994). Applied discriminant analysis. New York: Wiley and Sons.
12.
Mood, A.R. (1969). Macro-analysis of the American educational system . Operations Research, 17, 770-784.
13.
Pedhazur, E.J. (1997). Multiple regression in behavioral research: Explanation and prediction (3rd ed.). Stanford, CT: Thomson Learning.
14.
Rosnow, R.L., & Rosenthal, R. (1989). Statistical procedures and the justification of knowledge in psychological science. American Psychologist , 44, 1276-1284.
15.
Rowell, R.K. (1996). Partitioning predicted variance into constituent parts: How to conduct commonality analysis. In B. Thompson (Ed.), Advances in social science methodology (Vol. 4, pp. 33-44). Greenwich, CT : JAI Press.
16.
Snyder, P. (1991). Three reasons why stepwise regression methods should not be used by researchers . In B. Thompson (Ed.), ( 1991). Advances in educational research: Substantive findings, methodological developments (Vol. 1, pp. 99-105). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
17.
Thompson, B. (1989). Why won't stepwise methods die?Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 21 (4), 146-148.
18.
Thompson, B. (1994). The pivotal role of replication in psychological research: Empirically evaluating the replicability of sample results. Journal of Personality, 62, 157-176.
19.
Thompson, B. (1995). Stepwise regression and stepwise discriminate analysis need to apply here: A guidelines editorial. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 55, 525-534.
20.
Thompson, B. (2001). Significance, effect sizes, stepwise methods, and other issues: Strong arguments move the field. Journal of Experimental Education, 70, 80-93.
21.
Thompson, B. (2006a). Foundations of behavioral statistics: An insight-based approach. New York: Guilford.
22.
Thompson, B. (2006b). Research synthesis: Effect sizes. In J. Green, G. Camilli , & P. B. Elmore (Eds.), Complementary methods for research in education (pp. 583-603. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
23.
Thompson, B., & Borrello, G.M. (1985). The importance of structure coefficients in regression research. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 45, 203-209.
