Correlations and validity

[@tiphaniegibbs4319]

A new scale has concurrent validity with an existing scale of .80. What does this mean? Is this good? Bad?

[@reamay19]

Having trouble finding out how to estimate a criterion-related validity for my data. Also need to estimate Incremental Validity. What is the difference, and how would I enter it into SPSS?

[@clairmoon06]

Hi Ms. O'Toole! I'd like to ask you about the significance of correlation. If the output shows that the correlation is not statistically significant (p>0.05), can we say that there is no correlation between variable 1 and variable 2?

[@hole0101]

Thank you Ms O'Toole!

[@aikalu8767]

Does the sampling need to be equal for various factors? For example, does the number of women and men need to b equal? Please help me. I am really confused with what spling shall I use when doing factor analysis and taking some sources of bias as consideration (gender, course etc.). Thx

[@SiobhanPhD]

Aika Lu If you ask 5 different statisticians that question you'll get 5 different answers. Personally, I go for Factor Analysis is a fairly robust stat and with all the statistical options these days you can typically deal with unequal sample sizes statistically. Granted you don't want 5 females and 95 males or vice versa but 50/50 isn't really necessary for most stats these days. However, if this is for a dissertation or thesis the rule of law is "Whatever your chair says!"

[@aikalu8767]

Hahaha... thank you! :)

[@bravoechoalpha8426]

Hello, I would like to ask and I need the answer asap if possible please. I am trying to validate a 7 point likert questionnaire against a 6 point likert questionnaire. How do you do this if they have different scales? Thank you.

[@hanialbarni3925]

Hi , I test this model in the pearson correlations I got for example positive .757, .544, .473 and in sig all they are 0.000 what does this mean ? is this good or bad ? I compare here only the general constructs which have another constructs

[@SiobhanPhD]

Hani- I am assuming you got a positive value of .757 for the first correlation and the sig value listed under it was .000. I would make sure to comment on 4 things when describing this result in a write up: 1. the value (strong correlation), 2 direction (positive), 3. statistical significance, 4. interpretation. So something like X and Y had a statistically significant, strong, positive correlation (r(put your n size here) = .757, p < .001). As X increases Y tends to increase as well. It's hard to give more than that without knowing your variables... When I am learning a new stat I always look through 5-6 journal articles that used it to see how it's typically written up so I know what to include and get some ideas on wording...

[@hanialbarni3925]

Siobhan O'Toole well after getting output i talk like about variable 1 had strong value% correlation with "variable 2" , i did in all of them like this , in the end i describe which correlatino the highest and which one the lowest , Example: for trust factor it has moderate 49.1% correlation with "benefits perceived". Where i can put n size ? do i need to put p < .001 ? and why ?