相关系数的元分析:处理测量误差的警示故事。

IF 7.6 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Psychological methods Pub Date : 2024-04-01 Epub Date: 2022-05-23 DOI:10.1037/met0000498
Qian Zhang
{"title":"相关系数的元分析:处理测量误差的警示故事。","authors":"Qian Zhang","doi":"10.1037/met0000498","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A scale to measure a psychological construct is subject to measurement error. When meta-analyzing correlations obtained from scale scores, many researchers recommend correcting for measurement error. I considered three caveats when correcting for measurement error in meta-analysis of correlations: (a) the distribution of true scores can be non-normal, resulting in violation of the normality assumption for raw correlations and Fisher's z transformed correlations; (b) coefficient alpha is often used as the reliability, but correlations corrected for measurement error using alpha can be inaccurate when some assumptions of alpha (e.g., tau-equivalence) are violated; and (c) item scores are often ordinal, making the disattenuation formula potentially problematic. Via three simulation studies, I examined the performance of two meta-analysis approaches-with raw correlations and z scores. In terms of estimation accuracy and coverage probability of the mean correlation, results showed that (a) considering the true-score distribution alone, estimation of the mean correlation was slightly worse when true scores of the constructs were skewed rather than normal; (b) when the tau-equivalence assumption was violated and coefficient alpha was used for correcting measurement error, the mean correlation estimates can be biased and coverage probabilities can be low; and (c) discretization of continuous items can result in biased estimates and undercoverage of the mean correlations even when tau-equivalence was satisfied. With more categories and/or items on a scale, results can improve whether tau-equivalence was met or not. Based on these findings, I gave recommendations for conducting meta-analyses of correlations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":20782,"journal":{"name":"Psychological methods","volume":" ","pages":"308-330"},"PeriodicalIF":7.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Meta-analysis of correlation coefficients: A cautionary tale on treating measurement error.\",\"authors\":\"Qian Zhang\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/met0000498\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>A scale to measure a psychological construct is subject to measurement error. When meta-analyzing correlations obtained from scale scores, many researchers recommend correcting for measurement error. I considered three caveats when correcting for measurement error in meta-analysis of correlations: (a) the distribution of true scores can be non-normal, resulting in violation of the normality assumption for raw correlations and Fisher's z transformed correlations; (b) coefficient alpha is often used as the reliability, but correlations corrected for measurement error using alpha can be inaccurate when some assumptions of alpha (e.g., tau-equivalence) are violated; and (c) item scores are often ordinal, making the disattenuation formula potentially problematic. Via three simulation studies, I examined the performance of two meta-analysis approaches-with raw correlations and z scores. In terms of estimation accuracy and coverage probability of the mean correlation, results showed that (a) considering the true-score distribution alone, estimation of the mean correlation was slightly worse when true scores of the constructs were skewed rather than normal; (b) when the tau-equivalence assumption was violated and coefficient alpha was used for correcting measurement error, the mean correlation estimates can be biased and coverage probabilities can be low; and (c) discretization of continuous items can result in biased estimates and undercoverage of the mean correlations even when tau-equivalence was satisfied. With more categories and/or items on a scale, results can improve whether tau-equivalence was met or not. Based on these findings, I gave recommendations for conducting meta-analyses of correlations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20782,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychological methods\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"308-330\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychological methods\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000498\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/5/23 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological methods","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000498","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/5/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

测量心理结构的量表存在测量误差。在对量表得分的相关性进行元分析时,许多研究人员建议对测量误差进行校正。在对相关性进行元分析时,我考虑了修正测量误差的三个注意事项:(a) 真实分数的分布可能是非正态分布,从而导致违反原始相关性和费雪 z 转换相关性的正态性假设;(b) 通常使用系数 alpha 作为信度,但当 alpha 的某些假设(例如,tau-等效性)被违反时,使用 alpha 修正测量误差的相关性可能会不准确;(c) 在对相关性进行元分析时,可能会对测量误差进行修正;(d) 在对相关性进行元分析时,可能会对测量误差进行修正;(e) 在对相关性进行元分析时,可能会对测量误差进行修正、(c) 项目得分通常是顺序性的,这就使得析取公式可能存在问题。通过三项模拟研究,我考察了两种荟萃分析方法--原始相关性和 z 分数--的性能。就平均相关性的估计准确性和覆盖概率而言,结果显示:(a) 如果只考虑真实分数分布,而不考虑正态分布,则平均相关性的估计结果略差;(b) 如果违反了 tau-equivalence 假设,并使用系数 alpha 来纠正测量误差,平均相关估计值就会有偏差,覆盖概率也会很低;以及 (c) 即使满足了 tau-equivalence 假设,连续项目的离散化也会导致平均相关估计值有偏差和覆盖率不足。如果在量表中增加类别和/或项目,无论是否满足陶氏等效性,结果都会有所改善。基于这些发现,我提出了对相关性进行元分析的建议。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA,保留所有权利)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Meta-analysis of correlation coefficients: A cautionary tale on treating measurement error.

A scale to measure a psychological construct is subject to measurement error. When meta-analyzing correlations obtained from scale scores, many researchers recommend correcting for measurement error. I considered three caveats when correcting for measurement error in meta-analysis of correlations: (a) the distribution of true scores can be non-normal, resulting in violation of the normality assumption for raw correlations and Fisher's z transformed correlations; (b) coefficient alpha is often used as the reliability, but correlations corrected for measurement error using alpha can be inaccurate when some assumptions of alpha (e.g., tau-equivalence) are violated; and (c) item scores are often ordinal, making the disattenuation formula potentially problematic. Via three simulation studies, I examined the performance of two meta-analysis approaches-with raw correlations and z scores. In terms of estimation accuracy and coverage probability of the mean correlation, results showed that (a) considering the true-score distribution alone, estimation of the mean correlation was slightly worse when true scores of the constructs were skewed rather than normal; (b) when the tau-equivalence assumption was violated and coefficient alpha was used for correcting measurement error, the mean correlation estimates can be biased and coverage probabilities can be low; and (c) discretization of continuous items can result in biased estimates and undercoverage of the mean correlations even when tau-equivalence was satisfied. With more categories and/or items on a scale, results can improve whether tau-equivalence was met or not. Based on these findings, I gave recommendations for conducting meta-analyses of correlations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Psychological methods
Psychological methods PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
13.10
自引率
7.10%
发文量
159
期刊介绍: Psychological Methods is devoted to the development and dissemination of methods for collecting, analyzing, understanding, and interpreting psychological data. Its purpose is the dissemination of innovations in research design, measurement, methodology, and quantitative and qualitative analysis to the psychological community; its further purpose is to promote effective communication about related substantive and methodological issues. The audience is expected to be diverse and to include those who develop new procedures, those who are responsible for undergraduate and graduate training in design, measurement, and statistics, as well as those who employ those procedures in research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信