Measurement process comprises a number of elements, including the attribute being measured, the instrument being used to measure, the methods of using the instrument, and the unit of measurement. These findings confirm that synonym and antonym tests represent the same attribute so that both tests cannot be treated as two unique methods for measuring verbal ability. The correlation between factor scores of both methods is high (r = 0.994). However, either for the synonym or antonym items, the proportion of variance accounted for by the method is smaller than trait variance. Our analysis showed that measurement models that using correlated trait–correlated methods minus one, CT-C(M–1), that separated trait and method effect into distinct latent constructs yielded slightly better values for multiple goodness-of-fit indices than one factor model. The instrument used was the Graduate Academic Potential Test (PAPS), which includes synonym and antonym questions to measure verbal abilities. Study participants were 3,469 applicants to graduate school. The present study applied one of those models to examine whether method effects were presents in synonym and antonym tests.
Various models have been developed to accommodate the amount of variance attributable to the methods but these models application in empirical research is rare. Many researchers have assumed that different methods could be substituted to measure the same attributes in assessment.
0 kommentar(er)
