Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 1996-6
Taxometric Analysis: II. Detecting Taxonicity Using Covariance of Two Quantitative Indicators in Successive Intervals of a Third Indicator (Maxcov Procedure)
Given three quantitative indicators of a conjectured latent taxon, a statistical function defined as the covariance of two indicators (designated for the procedure as the “output” indicators) computed within successive intervals along the third (designated as “input”) indicator reveals whether the latent structure of the data is taxonic or not. If it is taxonic, latent parameters (base rate, hit rates, complement and taxon means) can be estimated, the latent distributions drawn, and subjects assigned to the taxon or the complement group. Several consistency tests are described. MAXCOV (MAXimum COVariance) is one of a related family of taxometric procedures in Meehl's Coherent Cut Kinetics Method.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
CarnapR. (1939) Foundations of logic and mathematics. International Encyclopedia of Unified Science, 1(3).
2.
CramérH. (1946) Mathematical methods of statistics.Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univer. Press.
3.
FisherR. A. (1970) Statistical methods for research workers. (14th ed.) Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd.
4.
GangestadS., & SnyderM (1985) “To carve nature at its joints”: on the existence of discrete classes in personality. Psychological Review, 92, 317–349.
5.
GoldenR., & MeehlP. E. (1973a) Detecting latent clinical taxa: IV. An empirical study of the maximum covariance method and the normal minimum chi-square method using three MMPI keys to identify the sexes. (Report No. PR-73-2) Minneapolis, MN: Univer. of Minnesota, Research Laboratories of the Department of Psychiatry.
6.
GoldenR., & MeehlP. E. (1973b) Detecting latent clinical taxa: V. A Monte Carlo study of the maximum covariance method and associated consistency tests. (Report No. PR-73-3) Minneapolis, MN: Univer. of Minnesota, Research Laboratories of the Department of Psychiatry.
7.
GroveW. M., & MeehlP. E. (1993) Simple regression-based procedures for taxometric investigations. Psychological Reports, 73, 707–737.
8.
HarrisG. T.RiceM. E., & QuinseyV. L. (1994) Psychopathy as a taxon: evidence that psychopaths are a discrete class. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 62, 387–397.
9.
HaslamN., & BeckA. T. (1994) Subtyping major depression: a taxometric analysis. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 103, 686–692.
10.
KenneyJ. F. (1939) Mathematics of statistics, Part II.New York: Van Nostrand.
11.
KorfineL., & LenzenwegerM. F. (1995) The taxonicity of schizotypy: a replication. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 104, 26–31.
12.
LenzenwegerM. F. (1993) Explorations in schizotypy and the psychometric high-risk paradigm. In ChapmanL. J.ChapmanJ. P., & FowlesD. C. (Eds.), Progress in experimental personality and psychopathology research.Vol. 16. New York: Springer. Pp. 66–116.
13.
LenzenwegerM. F., & KorfineL. (1992) Confirming the latent structure and base rate of schizotypy: a taxometric analysis. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 101, 567–571.
14.
LiC. C. (1975) Path analysis: a primer.Pacific Grove, CA: Boxwood Press.
15.
LowrieG. S., & RaulinM. L. (1990) Search for schizotypic and nonschizotypic taxonomies in a college population. Paper presented at the Sixty-first Annual Convention of the Eastern Psychological Association, Philadelphia, PA, March 29-April 1, 1990.
16.
MeehlP. E. (1956) Wanted—a good cookbook. American Psychologist, 11, 263–272. [Reprinted in P. E. Meehl, Psychodiagnosis: selected papers. Minneapolis, MN: Univer. of Minnesota Press, 1973. Pp. 63–80.]
17.
MeehlP. E. (1965) Detecting latent clinical taxa by fallible quantitative indicators lacking an accepted criterion. (Report No. PR-65-2) Minneapolis, MN: Univer. of Minnesota, Research Laboratories of the Department of Psychiatry.
18.
MeehlP. E. (1968) Detecting latent clinical taxa: II. A simplified procedure, some additional hitmax cut locators, a single-indicator method, and miscellaneous theorems. (Report No. PR-68-2) Minneapolis, MN: Univer. of Minnesota, Research Laboratories of the Department of Psychiatry.
19.
MeehlP. E. (1973) MAXCOV-HITMAX: a taxonomic search method for loose genetic syndromes. In MeehlP. E., Psychodiagnosis: selected papers.Minneapolis, MN: Univer. of Minnesota Press. Pp. 200–224.
20.
MeehlP. E. (1990a) Appraising and amending theories: the strategy of Lakatosian defense and two principles that warrant using it. Psychological Inquiry, 1, 108–141, 173–180.
21.
MeehlP. E. (1990b) Corroboration and verisimilitude: against Lakatos' “sheer leap of faith.” (Working Paper, MCPS-90-01) Minneapolis, MN: Univer. of Minnesota, Center for Philosophy or Science.
22.
MeehlP. E. (1990c) Toward an integrated theory of schizotaxia, schizotypy, and schizophrenia. Journal of Personality Disorders, 4, 1–99.
23.
MeehlP. E. (1992) Factors and taxa, traits and types, differences of degree and differences in kind. Journal of Personality, 60, 117–174.
24.
MeehlP. E. (1995a) Bootstraps taxometrics: solving the classification problem in psychopathology. American Psychologist, 50, 266–275.
25.
MeehlP. E. (1995b) Extension of the MAXCOV-HITMAX taxometric procedure to situations of sizeable nuisance covariance. In LubinskiD. & DawisR. V. (Eds.), Assessing individual differences in human behavior: new concepts, methods, and findings.Palo Alto, CA: Davies-Black. Pp. 81–92. [This is the first publication describing the generalized MAXCOV procedure.]
26.
MeehlP. E. (in press) The problem is epistemology, not statistics: replace significance tests by confidence intervals and quantify accuracy of risky numerical predictions. In HarlowL. L. (Ed.), What if there were no significance tests?Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
27.
MeehlP. E., & GoldenR. (1982) Taxometric methods. In KendallP. & ButcherJ. (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in clinical psychology.New York: Wiley. Pp. 127–181.
28.
MeehlP. E., & RosenA. (1955) Antecedent probability and the efficiency of psychometric signs, patterns, or cutting scores. Psychological Bulletin, 52, 194–216. [Reprinted in P. E. Meehl, Psychodiagnosis: selected papers. Minneapolis, MN: Univer. of Minnesota Press, 1973. Pp. 32–62.]
29.
MeehlP. E., & YonceL. J. (1994) Taxometric Analysis: I. Detecting taxonicity with two quantitative indicators using means above and below a sliding cut (MAMBAC procedure). Psychological Reports, 74, 1059–1274.
30.
SnyderM., & GangestadS. (1986) On the nature of self-monitoring: matters of assessment, matters of validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 125–137.
31.
Statistical Sciences, Inc. (1993) S-Plus for Windows (Version 3.1).Seattle, WA: Statistical Sciences, Inc.
32.
StrubeM. J. (1989) Evidence for the type in Type A behavior: a taxometric analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 972–987.
33.
TrullT. J.WidderT. A., & GuthrieP. (1990) Categorical versus dimensional status of borderline personality disorder. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 99, 40–48.
34.
TyrkaA. R.CannonT. D.HaslamN.MednickS. A.SchulsingerF.SchulsingerH., & ParnasJ. (1995) The latent structure of schizotypy premorbid indicators of a taxon of individuals at risk for schizophrenia-spectrum disordersJournal of Abnormal Psychology, 104, 173–183.
35.
TukeyJ. W. (1977) Exploratory data analysis.Reading, MAAddison-Wesley.
36.
WallerN. G., & MeehlP. E. (in preparation) Multivariate taxometric procedures: distinguishing types from continua.Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
37.
WallerN. G.PutnamF. W., & CarlsonE. B. (in press) Types of dissociation and dissociative types: a taxometric analysis of dissociative experiences. Psychological Methods.
