Three conceptual representations of correlation are presented and evaluated in terms of the extent to which they deal with various sources of respondent bias. The basic hurdles the researcher must overcome before the results of simple correlational analysis allow inferences to be drawn are discussed, along with potential misinterpretations involving the level of significance and various other issues surrounding the use of the Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BakanD.On method. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1968.
2.
BinderA.Considerations of the place of assumptions in correlational analysis. American Psychologist, 1969, 14, 504–510.
3.
BrewerJ. K.HillsJ. R.Univariate selection: The effects of size of correlation, degree of skew, and degree of restriction. Psychometrika, 1969, 34, 347–361.
4.
BrogdenH. E.Some observations on two methods in psychology. Psychological Bulletin, 1972, 77, 431–437.
5.
CarrollJ. B.The nature of data, or how to choose a correlation coefficient. Psychometrika, 1961, 26, 347–372.
6.
CronbachL. J.Test validation. In ThorndikeR. L. (Ed.), Educational measurement. Washington, D. C.: American Council on Education, 1971. Pp. 443–507.
7.
DesotoC. B.KuetheJ. L.On the relation between two variables. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 1960, 20, 743–749.
8.
HaggardE. A.Intraclass correlation and the analysis of variance. New York: Dryden, 1958.
9.
HaysW. L.Statistics for psychologists. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1963.
10.
HindelangM. J.The effects of normality violations on the interpretation of correlation coefficients. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 1971, 8, 156–164.
11.
MayoR. J.Some comments on practical significance in the experimental study. Psychology, 1975, in press.
12.
MulaikS. A.The foundations of factor analysis. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1972.
13.
NorrisR.An empirical investigation on the effects of non-normality upon the sampling distributions of the product-moment coefficient. Nashville, Tenn.: George Peabody College for Teachers, 1960.
14.
QuereshiM. Y.Note on the Pearson r as a function of the bivariate distributional characteristics. Journal of Educational Measurement, 1971, 8, 225–227.
