What you see is not what you get: Observed scale score comparisons misestimate true group differences.

IF 4.6 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Behavior Research Methods Pub Date : 2025-03-19 DOI:10.3758/s13428-025-02639-w
Bjarne Schmalbach, Ileana Schmalbach, Jochen Hardt
{"title":"What you see is not what you get: Observed scale score comparisons misestimate true group differences.","authors":"Bjarne Schmalbach, Ileana Schmalbach, Jochen Hardt","doi":"10.3758/s13428-025-02639-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Social sciences of all kinds are interested in latent variables, their measurement, and how they differ between groups. The present study argues the importance of analyzing mean differences between groups using the latent variable approach. Using an open-access repository of widely applied personality questionnaires (N = 999,033), we evaluate the extent to which the commonly used observed sum score is susceptible to measurement error. Our findings show that Cohen's d values based on the observed variance significantly misestimate the true group difference (based on just the factor score variance) in 33 of the 70 studied cases, and by an average of 25.0% (or 0.048 standard deviations). There was no meaningful relationship between the effect size discrepancy and scale reliability as measured by McDonald's ω. We discuss the implications of these results and outline concrete steps that applied researchers can take to improve their analyses.</p>","PeriodicalId":8717,"journal":{"name":"Behavior Research Methods","volume":"57 4","pages":"122"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11923020/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Behavior Research Methods","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-025-02639-w","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Social sciences of all kinds are interested in latent variables, their measurement, and how they differ between groups. The present study argues the importance of analyzing mean differences between groups using the latent variable approach. Using an open-access repository of widely applied personality questionnaires (N = 999,033), we evaluate the extent to which the commonly used observed sum score is susceptible to measurement error. Our findings show that Cohen's d values based on the observed variance significantly misestimate the true group difference (based on just the factor score variance) in 33 of the 70 studied cases, and by an average of 25.0% (or 0.048 standard deviations). There was no meaningful relationship between the effect size discrepancy and scale reliability as measured by McDonald's ω. We discuss the implications of these results and outline concrete steps that applied researchers can take to improve their analyses.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.30
自引率
9.30%
发文量
266
期刊介绍: Behavior Research Methods publishes articles concerned with the methods, techniques, and instrumentation of research in experimental psychology. The journal focuses particularly on the use of computer technology in psychological research. An annual special issue is devoted to this field.
期刊最新文献
ESM-Q: A consensus-based quality assessment tool for experience sampling method items. Sample size matters when estimating test-retest reliability of behaviour. Appropriate modeling of endogeneity in cross-lagged models: Efficacy of auxiliary and model-implied instrumental variables. What you see is not what you get: Observed scale score comparisons misestimate true group differences. Ready to ROC? A tutorial on simulation-based power analyses for null hypothesis significance, minimum-effect, and equivalence testing for ROC curve analyses.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1