当前位置: X-MOL 学术Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Don’t Use a Bifactor Model Unless You Believe the True Structure Is Bifactor
Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment ( IF 1.5 ) Pub Date : 2020-12-08 , DOI: 10.1177/0734282920977718
Scott L. Decker 1
Affiliation  

The current article provides a response to concerns raised by Dombrowski, McGill, Canivez, Watkins, & Beaujean (2020) regarding the methodological confounds identified by Decker, Bridges, Luedke, and Eason (2020) for using a bifactor (BF) model and Schmid–Leiman (SL) procedure in previous studies supporting a general factor of intelligence (i.e., “g”). While Dombrowski et al. (2020) raised important theoretical and practical issues, the theoretical justification for using a BF model and SL procedure to identify cognitive dimensions remain unaddressed, as well as significant concerns for using these statistical methods as the basis for informing the use of cognitive tests in clinical applications.

中文翻译:

不要使用双因子模型,除非你相信真正的结构是双因子

当前文章回应了 Dombrowski、McGill、Canivez、Watkins 和 Beaujean(2020 年)提出的关于 Decker、Bridges、Luedke 和 Eason(2020 年)使用双因子 (BF) 模型和 Schmid 确定的方法混淆的问题– 先前研究中的莱曼 (SL) 程序支持智力的一般因素(即“g”)。虽然 Dombrowski 等人。(2020) 提出了重要的理论和实践问题,使用 BF 模型和 SL 程序来识别认知维度的理论依据仍未得到解决,以及使用这些统计方法作为通知在临床中使用认知测试的基础的重大问题。应用程序。
更新日期:2020-12-08
down
wechat
bug