Article

The Correction for Attenuation Due to Measurement Error: Clarifying Concepts and Creating Confidence Sets.

Department of Psychology, University of California, Davis, CA 95616, USA.
Psychological Methods (Impact Factor: 4.45). 07/2005; 10(2):206-26. DOI: 10.1037/1082-989X.10.2.206
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT

The correction for attenuation due to measurement error (CAME) has received many historical criticisms, most of which can be traced to the limited ability to use CAME inferentially. Past attempts to determine confidence intervals for CAME are summarized and their limitations discussed. The author suggests that inference requires confidence sets that demarcate those population parameters likely to have produced an obtained value--rather than indicating the samples likely to be produced by a given population--and that most researchers tend to confuse these 2 types of confidence sets. Three different Monte-Carlo methods are presented, each offering a different way of examining confidence sets under the new conceptualization. Exploring the implications of these approaches for CAME suggests potential consequences for other statistics.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Eric Phillip Charles, Feb 19, 2014

Click to see the full-text of:

Article: The Correction for Attenuation Due to Measurement Error: Clarifying Concepts and Creating Confidence Sets.

351.36 KB

See full-text
  • Source
    • "The problem is that the two sources of bias are not guaranteed to exactly cancel out the impact of attenuation (except by chance) and, as shown by Rönkkö (2014), will often lead to positively biased and inefficient estimates. Considering that we have more than a hundred years of research showing how the effects of measurement error can be adjusted in regression analysis with composites through the well-known correction for attenuation (cf., Charles, 2005; Muchinsky, 1996), or using errors-in-variables regression (Fuller, 1987), relying on a capitalization on chance in small samples is hardly the optimal approach for dealing with measurement error attenuation (Rönkkö, 2014, pp. 176–177). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The partial least squares technique (PLS) has been touted as a viable alternative to latent variable structural equation modeling (SEM) for evaluating theoretical models in the differential psychology domain. We bring some balance to the discussion by reviewing the broader methodological literature to highlight: (1) the misleading characterization of PLS as an SEM method; (2) limitations of PLS for global model testing; (3) problems in testing the significance of path coefficients; (4) extremely high false positive rates when using empirical confidence intervals in conjunction with a new “sign change correction” for path coefficients; (5) misconceptions surrounding the supposedly superior ability of PLS to handle small sample sizes and non-normality; and (6) conceptual and statistical problems with formative measurement and the application of PLS to such models. Additionally, we also reanalyze the dataset provided by Willaby et al. (2015; doi:10.1016/j.paid.2014.09.008) to highlight the limitations of PLS. Our broader review and analysis of the available evidence makes it clear that PLS is not useful for statistical estimation and testing.
    Full-text · Article · Jul 2015 · Personality and Individual Differences
  • Source
    • "Allowing unreliability in ratings of job performance to affect the conclusions that can be drawn about direct and indirect determinants of job performance is irresponsible. " This would amount to preferring a systematically biased measure over a more variable unbiased measure, encouraging a misrepresentation of data " (Charles, 2005, p. 222). If LeBreton et al.'s emotional preferences were to be embraced, they would lead to disastrous scientific consequences for our field. "

    Full-text · Article · Dec 2014 · Industrial and Organizational Psychology
    • "(N = 801). If corrected for attenuation by measurement error (see e.g., Charles, 2005), this coefficient would be perfect (i.e., r tt = 1.0). Similarly, Kaiser and Byrka (2011) reported that their two assessments of attitude toward environmental protection converged after 24 months to r tt = .67 "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Introduction L’attitude envers la nature et l’attitude envers la protection de l’environnement constituent deux notions distinctes mais corrélées. Cependant, la stabilité/instabilité dans le temps de ces deux attitudes reste mal connue. Objectifs et méthodes À partir de données issues d’une enquête longitudinale menée auprès de 251 adultes, et intégrées dans un modèle d’équations structurelles, nous avons examiné les changements spontanés dans les deux attitudes, ainsi que des preuves circonstancielles de la direction de leur relation de causalité. En effet, cette relation peut aller dans l’une des deux directions ou même être bi-directionnelle. Résultats Nous avons confirmé le rapport substantiel entre l’attitude envers la nature et l’attitude envers la protection de l’environnement ; cependant, l’absence de changement dans les attitudes malgré l’avancée dans l’âge des sujets ne permet pas d’affirmer clairement un lien de causalité. Conclusion Protéger l’environnement en passant par des appréciations encourageantes de la nature est possible, mais les changements d’attitudes envers la nature et envers la protection de l’environnement semblent difficiles à obtenir chez les adultes.
    No preview · Article · Nov 2014 · Revue Européenne de Psychologie Appliquée
Show more