Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-d8cs5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-08T11:32:44.920Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparison of Two Factorial Analyses

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2025

Karl J. Holzinger  and
Harry H. Harman
Karl J. Holzinger
Affiliation:
University of Chicago
Harry H. Harman
Affiliation:
University of Chicago
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A Bi-factor analysis is made of Professor Thurstone's battery of fifty-seven tests employing his tetrachoric correlations. Although this analysis is made entirely independent of his multiple factor analysis, a very close agreement is found between the group factors obtained here and Thurstone's verbal descriptions previously published.

Type
Original Paper
Information
Psychometrika , Volume 3 , Issue 1 , March 1938 , pp. 45 - 60
Copyright
Copyright © 1938 The Psychometric Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

L. L. Thurstone, “The Factorial Isolation of Primary Abilities,” Psychometrika, 1936, 1, No. 3, pp. 175-182. The present analysis was made immediately after the appearance of this article. The publicatien of our article was properly postponed until the appearance of Professor Thurstone's numerical solution.

References

1 First introduced in Preliminarry Report on Spearman-Holzinger Unitary Trait Study, No. 7. Prepared at the Statistical Laboratory, Department of Education, University of Chicago, 1936.

2 The rejection of test 28 as the fourth test in the “spatial” group and its retention later as the twelfth test is an example to be found in Section 3.

1 See Preliminary Report on Spearman-Holzinger Unitary Trait Study, No. 2, equation (6).

1 Holzinger, K. J., and Harman, H. H., “Relationship between Factors obtained from Certain Analyses,” The Journal of Educational Psychology, May, 1937, pp. 321-346.