Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to submit your manuscript to SPPS

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

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
Right arrow Citation Map
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 Schmitt, N.
Right arrow Articles by Stults, D. M.
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?

Reviews

Methodology Review: Analysis of Multitrait-Multimethod Matrices

Neal Schmitt

Michigan State University

Daniel M. Stults

Quaker Oats Company

Procedures for analyzing multitrait-multimethod (MTMM) matrices are reviewed. Confirmatory factor analysis (Jöreskog, 1974) is presented as a general model allowing evaluation of the discriminant and convergent validity of MTMM matrices, both as a whole and in individual trait-method units. However, it is noted that this model is deficient with regard to analysis of trait-method interactions of the type de scribed by Campbell and O'Connell (1967, 1982). Composite direct product models described by Browne (1984) are one possible solution to this problem. Fur ther, more systematic use of hypothesis testing regard ing convergent and discriminant validity in nested hi erarchical models is recommended (Widaman, 1985), as well as the use of a procedure to cross-validate models of MTMM matrices described by Cudeck and Browne (1983).

Applied Psychological Measurement, Vol. 10, No. 1, 1-22 (1986)
DOI: 10.1177/014662168601000101


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
Human RelationsHome page
I. Harpaz and X. Fu
The Structure of the Meaning of Work: A Relative Stability Amidst Change
Human Relations, June 1, 2002; 55(6): 639 - 667.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Applied Psychological MeasurementHome page
R. P. Bagozzi and Y. Yi
Testing Hypotheses About Methods, Traits, and Communalities in the Direct-Product Model
Applied Psychological Measurement, December 1, 1992; 16(4): 373 - 380.
[PDF]


Home page
Stat Methods Med ResHome page
P. Bentler and J. Stein
Structural equation models in medical research
Statistical Methods in Medical Research, August 1, 1992; 1(2): 159 - 181.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Applied Psychological MeasurementHome page
K. Schweizer
An Equal-Level Approach to the Investigation of Multitrait-Multimethod Matrices
Applied Psychological Measurement, September 1, 1991; 15(3): 307 - 317.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Applied Psychological MeasurementHome page
H. W. Marsh and M. Bailey
Confirmatory Factor Analyses of Multitrait-Multimethod Data: A Comparison of Alternative Models
Applied Psychological Measurement, March 1, 1991; 15(1): 47 - 70.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Applied Psychological MeasurementHome page
H. W. Marsh
Confirmatory Factor Analyses of Multitrait-Multimethod Data: Many Problems and a Few Solutions
Applied Psychological Measurement, December 1, 1989; 13(4): 335 - 361.
[Abstract]


Home page
Applied Psychological MeasurementHome page
D. R. Lehmann
An Alternative Procedure for Assessing Convergent and Discriminant Validity
Applied Psychological Measurement, December 1, 1988; 12(4): 411 - 423.
[Abstract]