Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-grxwn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-08T12:15:06.938Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Relation of Multiserial Eta to other Measures of Correlation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2025

Robert J. Wherry
Affiliation:
University of North Carolina
Erwin K. Taylor
Affiliation:
Personnel Research Section, A.G.O.

Abstract

Ordinary product-moment correlation and regression methods are frequently not immediately applicable to qualitative data, whereas multiserial r, point-multiserial r, and multiserial eta can be easily applied. The multiserial r is rejected for prediction since it tells us only what the correlation might be if certain assumptions were true and if we could measure what is not now measured. The point-multiserial r and multiserial eta are identical when the number of categories is two but differ when it is three or greater. The multiserial eta is identical with the product-moment r when categories are assigned scale values equal to their means on the continuous variable. With three or more categories, the point-multiserial r, which assumes linearity with equal step intervals, is always lower than the multiserial eta, which forces linearity by adoption of unequal step intervals based upon difference in criterion attainment. While the multiserial eta expends one degree of freedom with the weighting of each category, this is known and correctable, whereas the vague partial loss of degrees of freedom due to the ordering of categories in the point-multiserial is not correctable.

Type
Original Paper
Copyright
Copyright © 1946 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.)

References

Peters, C. C. and Van Voorhis, . Statistical procedures and their mathematical bases (pp. 315315). New York: McGraw Hill, 1940.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richardson, M. W. and Stalnaker, J. M. A note on the use of biserial r in test research. J. gen. Psychol., 1933, 8, 463463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burt, C. Statistical problems in the evaluation of Army tests. Psychometrika, 1944, 9, 219236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wherry, R. J. Maximal weighting of qualitative data. Psychometrika, 1944, 9, 263266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelley, T. L. An unbiased correlation measure. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci., 1935, 21, 554559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar