Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for FREE ACCESS to this landmark database

Click here for more information on Research and Evaluation in Education and Psychology, 3e

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Applied Psychological Measurement
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Levin, J. R.
Right arrow Articles by Subkoviak, M. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Planning an Experiment in the Company of Measurement Error

Joel R. Levin

Department of Educational Psychology, University of Wisconsin

Michael J. Subkoviak

University of Wisconsin

"Textbook" calculations of statistical power and/or sample size follow from formulas that as sume that the variables under consideration are measured without error. However, in the "real world" of behavioral research, errors of measure ment cannot be neglected. A recent sample-size determination approach is easily adapted to incor porate unreliability information for both com pletely randomized and randomized block anal ysis-of-variance designs. A worked example pre sents an instance wherein a blocking strategy is clearly advantageous assuming infallible measur ing instruments, but not when the same instru ments are granted fallibility.

Applied Psychological Measurement, Vol. 1, No. 3, 331-338 (1977)
DOI: 10.1177/014662167700100302


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Organizational Research MethodsHome page
J. T. Austin, K. A. Boyle, and J. C. Lualhati
Statistical Conclusion Validity for Organizational Science Researchers: A Review
Organizational Research Methods, April 1, 1998; 1(2): 164 - 208.
[Abstract]


Home page
Journal of Psychoeducational AssessmentHome page
P. L. Smith
Statistical and Procedural Issues in Psychoeducational Studies
Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, December 1, 1984; 2(4): 293 - 324.
[Abstract] [PDF]