The Questionable Practice of Partialing to Refine Scores on and Inferences About Measures of Psychological Constructs.

IF 17.8 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY Annual Review of Clinical Psychology Pub Date : 2023-05-09 Epub Date: 2023-02-07 DOI:10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-071720-015436
Rick H Hoyle, Donald R Lynam, Joshua D Miller, Jolynn Pek
{"title":"The Questionable Practice of Partialing to Refine Scores on and Inferences About Measures of Psychological Constructs.","authors":"Rick H Hoyle, Donald R Lynam, Joshua D Miller, Jolynn Pek","doi":"10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-071720-015436","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Partialing is a statistical approach researchers use with the goal of removing extraneous variance from a variable before examining its association with other variables. Controlling for confounds through analysis of covariance or multiple regression analysis and residualizing variables for use in subsequent analyses are common approaches to partialing in clinical research. Despite its intuitive appeal, partialing is fraught with undesirable consequences when predictors are correlated. After describing effects of partialing on variables, we review analytic approaches commonly used in clinical research to make inferences about the nature and effects of partialed variables. We then use two simulations to show how partialing can distort variables and their relations with other variables. Having concluded that, with rare exception, partialing is ill-advised, we offer recommendations for reducing or eliminating problematic uses of partialing. We conclude that the best alternative to partialing is to define and measure constructs so that it is not needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":50755,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Clinical Psychology","volume":"19 ","pages":"155-176"},"PeriodicalIF":17.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11331532/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annual Review of Clinical Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-071720-015436","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/2/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Partialing is a statistical approach researchers use with the goal of removing extraneous variance from a variable before examining its association with other variables. Controlling for confounds through analysis of covariance or multiple regression analysis and residualizing variables for use in subsequent analyses are common approaches to partialing in clinical research. Despite its intuitive appeal, partialing is fraught with undesirable consequences when predictors are correlated. After describing effects of partialing on variables, we review analytic approaches commonly used in clinical research to make inferences about the nature and effects of partialed variables. We then use two simulations to show how partialing can distort variables and their relations with other variables. Having concluded that, with rare exception, partialing is ill-advised, we offer recommendations for reducing or eliminating problematic uses of partialing. We conclude that the best alternative to partialing is to define and measure constructs so that it is not needed.

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
用偏分法来完善心理结构测量的分数和推论的做法值得商榷。
偏差分析是研究人员使用的一种统计方法,目的是在研究变量与其他变量的关联之前,去除变量的无关方差。在临床研究中,通过协方差分析或多元回归分析来控制混杂因素,并对变量进行残差分析,以便在后续分析中使用,这些都是常用的偏置方法。尽管偏倚法具有直观的吸引力,但当预测因子具有相关性时,偏倚法会带来很多不良后果。在描述了偏置对变量的影响后,我们回顾了临床研究中常用的分析方法,以推断偏置变量的性质和影响。然后,我们用两个模拟实验来说明偏倚如何扭曲变量及其与其他变量的关系。在得出偏倚是不明智的结论后,我们提出了减少或消除使用偏倚的建议。我们得出的结论是,替代偏倚的最佳方法是定义和测量构造,这样就不需要偏倚了。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
31.50
自引率
0.50%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: The Annual Review of Clinical Psychology is a publication that has been available since 2005. It offers comprehensive reviews on significant developments in the field of clinical psychology and psychiatry. The journal covers various aspects including research, theory, and the application of psychological principles to address recognized disorders such as schizophrenia, mood, anxiety, childhood, substance use, cognitive, and personality disorders. Additionally, the articles also touch upon broader issues that cut across the field, such as diagnosis, treatment, social policy, and cross-cultural and legal issues. Recently, the current volume of this journal has transitioned from a gated access model to an open access format through the Annual Reviews' Subscribe to Open program. All articles published in this volume are now available under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY), allowing for widespread distribution and use. The journal is also abstracted and indexed in various databases including Scopus, Science Citation Index Expanded, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Academic Search, among others.
期刊最新文献
Climate Change and Mental Health Wisdom, Resilience, and Well-Being in Later Life The Mental Health of Sexual Minority Individuals: Five Explanatory Theories and Their Implications for Intervention and Future Research The Alternative Model of Personality Disorders: Assessment, Convergent and Discriminant Validity, and a Look to the Future. Treatment of Eating Disorders: Current Status, Challenges, and Future Directions.
×
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