Latent class analysis was originally introduced by Lazarsfeld to analyze categorical latent variables from a set of categorical manifest variables. Several test statistics have been previously proposed for evaluating the goodness of fit of latent class model. They provide the means to test whether a latent factor explains the observed associations. So far, however, little is known about the sensitivity of latent class analysis to detect the true latent structure (convergent) or to discriminate an inappropriate model from the true model (discriminant). This study provides some strategies for researchers to assess both convergent and discriminant sensitivity of latent class analysis using simulation methods The impact of several factors on convergent sensitivity of latent class analysis were investigated. These factors include (1) sample size, (2) nearness of unconditional probabilities to 0.5, (3) nearness of conditional probabilities to one or zero, (4) strength of association between latent and manifest variables and (5) nearness of the pair of conditional probabilities among all latent classes for any manifest variable. Factors (1), (2) and (3) address the sample size issue. Factors (4) and (5) address the strength of association. Results confirm that convergent sensitivity is globally improved by increasing either the sample size or the strength of association It was also found that the discriminatory power of latent class analysis to distinguish an inappropriate model from the true latent structure is significantly high. Based on the findings of this study, we believe researchers can significantly improve their study designs / acase@tulane.edu

Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) is a commonly used statistical procedure for group comparison in behavioral research, however, the traditional parametric approach for MANOVA when there are more than two groups has Type I error rates that deviate from stated alpha (Olson, 1976) and may have poor power (Stevens, 1980). The approximate randomization test (ART), a nonparametric and computer intensive approach, has been recently recommended as a theoretically attractive alternative to parametric MANOVA (Edgington, 1987; Manly, 1991), but its performance relative to the parametric procedures has not been empirically investigated. The main purpose of this study is to evaluate the advantages, disadvantages, and feasibility of applying the ART for MANOVA using Monte Carlo methods. Results indicate that, contrary to the common belief, the ART in general yield Type I error rates similar in tendency and degree to that for parametric methods under assumption violations. Although the ART using composite z score as statistic recommended by Edgington (1987) is less biased compared to the parametric method under assumption violations, it may not test the same hypothesis tested by the parametric method. This study concludes that despite the theoretical attractiveness of the ART, none of the previously recommended statistics yields a satisfactory test for replacing the parametric MANOVA / acase@tulane.edu

This study assessed the relationship between second and fifth graders' strategy use and performance on the Digit Span subtest of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Revised (Wechsler, 1974). Verbal reports and observations were used to assess each subject's cognitive processes on the Digit Span tasks and to relate each subject's metamemorial knowledge to task performance. In addition, the relationship between response latency (time used to begin recall of digit series and time used to recall digit series) and performance on Digits Backward was investigated Fifth graders reported using more complex strategies than second graders. Second graders were observed to use rehearsal more on Digits Backward. Grouping predicted the performance for second graders on the Digit Span tasks while rehearsal and grouping predicted the performance of fifth graders on Digit Span tasks. Response latency was related to performance on Digits Backward for both grades, with a longer recall time on latter trials positively predicting performance While not a major focus of study, there were gender differences in performance. Overall, females performed better than males on Digits Backward; and, they also had a higher mean Digit Span scaled score than males. Females were observed using rehearsal more often than males on Digits Backward / acase@tulane.edu

No description available.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Indiana University, School of Health, Physical Education and Recreation, 2007. / Title from dissertation home page (viewed Sept. 24, 2008). Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 69-02, Section: A, page: 0550. Adviser: Francis M. Kozub.

Thesis (M.A.)--University of Notre Dame, 2008. / Thesis directed by Ke-Hai Yuan for the Department of Psychology. "December 2008." Includes bibliographical references (leaves 105-106).

There has been much debate in the literature regarding the use and abuse of projective drawings in clinical and school settings. The criticism has largely centered around interpretation and use of indicators within these drawings that have not achieved consensus in the research regarding their validity. This study attempts to bridge the gap between those opposed and those in support of projective drawings. It does this by illustrating that valid indicators can be found within projective drawings provided accurate, sensitive and reliable tools are available to measure these indicators. This research analyzed the relationship between pencil pressure used during drawing and State and Trait anxiety. A highly accurate and precise pressure sensitive palette was used to reliably and objectively measure the degree of pencil pressure used by the participants during three drawing tests, including the Draw a Person, Bender-Gestalt Visual Motor Integration Test, and the drawing of an automobile (n = 50). The State Trait Anxiety Inventory for Children assessed the participants' levels of State and Trait anxiety. Results indicated that individuals with higher levels of Trait anxiety used significantly less pencil pressure on all three drawing measures than individuals with lower levels of Trait anxiety. Further, individuals with high and low levels of State anxiety used significantly more pencil pressure on all three drawing measures than individuals with medium levels of State anxiety. The implications of these findings, as well as considerations for future research are discussed.

The purpose of this study was to examine the reliability and validity of out-of-level (OOL) testing for students with mild cognitive disabilities participating in large-scale accountability assessments. Federal law now requires maximum participation of students with disabilities in these assessments, and OOL testing is one method used to accomplish this mandate. However, the prevalence, reliability, and validity of this practice have not been established. This study involved the analysis of second through eighth grade students' OOL and grade-level (GL) Stanford 9 reading and math subtest data. Raw data was collected by the district studied, as part of an annual state-mandated testing program. Participation rates and methods of participation for students with Specific Learning Disability (SLD) and Mild Mental Retardation (MIMR) were examined over a five-year period. Results indicated that an over 700% increase in the numbers of MIMR and SLD students participating in Stanford 9 testing occurred from 1998 to 2002. The use of OOL tests also increased substantially during that period. With regard to reliability, results indicated that KR-20 coefficients were comparable across regular education GL and Special Education OOL test groups. In addition, comparable percentages of students in GL and OOL groups scored within the test's reliable range. Special Education students were not given tests that were too easy as a result of OOL testing options. Validity evaluation included comparisons of modified caution indices (MCI) and point-biserial correlations for matched GL and OOL groups, as well as differential item functioning (DIF) analyses. MCI and point-biserial analyses provided no evidence of differential validity for GL and OOL groups. Although DIF analyses identified more items as functioning differently across groups (GL vs. OOL) than would be expected by chance, no systematic patterns of bias resulting from the OOL test administration condition were identified. OOL testing was determined to be an appropriate method of achievement testing for students with SLD. True differences between OOL and GL groups, as well as differences in test administration other than the OOL versus GL condition are discussed. Recommendations regarding OOL testing policy, stakeholder education, test development and reporting practices, and future research are included.

The scores or metrics from psychological measures are rarely interpretable. Uninterpretable metrics result in poorly understood psychological research findings. In response to this problem, several methods are proposed that render metrics more meaningful. The methods employed are calibration procedures. Three calibration procedures are illustrated that prove to be extremely powerful in making the metrics of two related measures more understandable. Establishing the behavioral implications of the scores, computing just noticeable differences, and calibrating between measures are the three procedures described and illustrated. For the purposes of illustration, two measures of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) are used in the calibration procedures. These two measures are often used interchangeably without regard to their relationship with one another. The three procedures and the results of each are discussed in detail.

The primary rationale for the study was to empirically test a conceptual model that identifies the relationship between wayfinding, spatial, and scholastic abilities. Wayfinding and spatial abilities were assessed in 120 University of Arizona introductory psychology students ranging in age from 17 to 36 years. Participants completed a lengthy test battery of wayfinding and spatial abilities tasks. Tasks included the computer-generated arena task, the computer-generated maze task, a Background Information Questionnaire, the Taxi Cab Task, the performance subtests from the WAIS-III, the Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure Test, and the Object Relations Task. A structural equations model showed that spatial abilities predict wayfinding ability (β = .68, p < .05) and that scholastic aptitude predicts spatial abilities (β = .45, p < .05), but not wayfinding ability (β = -.27, ns). The data more than adequately fit the theory-driven conceptual model (CFI = .971; χ² = 36.794; p < 30). In addition, several first-order factors of spatial abilities proved reliable and highly correlated to their indicators (i.e., the WAIS-III performance subtests). Findings from this study suggest that a theory-driven conceptual model provides useful predictive information about the relationship between wayfinding and spatial abilities factors. Moreover, the evidence supports, and hopefully inspires, advocacy for an interdisciplinary approach to studying the relationship between wayfinding and conceptually related cognitive processes.