• español
  • English
  • français
  • Deutsch
  • português (Brasil)
  • italiano
  • Contacto
  • Sugerencias
    • español
    • English
    • français
    • Deutsch
    • português (Brasil)
    • italiano
    • español
    • English
    • français
    • Deutsch
    • português (Brasil)
    • italiano
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.
    Gredos. Repositorio documental de la Universidad de SalamancaUniversidad de Salamanca
    Consorcio BUCLE Recolector

    Listar

    Todo GredosComunidades y ColeccionesPor fecha de publicaciónAutoresMateriasTítulosEsta colecciónPor fecha de publicaciónAutoresMateriasTítulos

    Mi cuenta

    AccederRegistro

    Estadísticas

    Ver Estadísticas de uso

    ENLACES Y ACCESOS

    Derechos de autorPolíticasGuías de autoarchivoFAQAdhesión USAL a la Declaración de Berlín

    COMPARTIR

    Ver ítem 
    •   Gredos Principal
    • Repositorio Científico
    • Departamentos
    • Ciencias Sociales
    • Departamento Personalidad, Evaluación y Tratamiento Psicológicos
    • DPETP. Artículos del Departamento de Personalidad, Evaluación y Tratamiento Psicológicos
    • Ver ítem
    •   Gredos Principal
    • Repositorio Científico
    • Departamentos
    • Ciencias Sociales
    • Departamento Personalidad, Evaluación y Tratamiento Psicológicos
    • DPETP. Artículos del Departamento de Personalidad, Evaluación y Tratamiento Psicológicos
    • Ver ítem

    Compartir

    Exportar

    RISMendeleyRefworksZotero
    • edm
    • marc
    • xoai
    • qdc
    • ore
    • ese
    • dim
    • uketd_dc
    • oai_dc
    • etdms
    • rdf
    • mods
    • mets
    • didl
    • premis

    Citas

    2
    CITATIONS
    2 total citations on Dimensions.
    2 Total citations
    1 Recent citation
    0.41 Field Citation Ratio
    0.38 Relative Citation Ratio
    Plum Print visual indicator of research metrics
    plumX logo
    • Citations
      • Citation Indexes: 2
    • Captures
      • Readers: 7
    see details
    Título
    A valid and reliable measure of nothing: disentangling the “Gavagai effect” in survey data
    Autor(es)
    Arias González, Victor BenitoAutoridad USAL
    Ponce, Fernando P.
    Bruggeman, Martin
    Flores Robaina, Noelia EmmaAutoridad USAL
    Jenaro Río, CristinaAutoridad USAL ORCID
    Palabras clave
    Survey research
    Validity
    Validation
    Measurement
    Gavagai
    Factor analysis
    Fecha de publicación
    2020-11-17
    Editor
    PeerJ
    Citación
    Arias VB, Ponce FP, Bruggeman M, Flores N, Jenaro C. 2020. A valid and reliable measure of nothing: disentangling the ‘‘Gavagai effect’’ in survey data. PeerJ8: e10209 http://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.10209
    Resumen
    [EN]Background. In three recent studies, Maul demonstrated that sets of nonsense items can acquire excellent psychometric properties. Our aim was to find out why responses to nonsense items acquire a well-defined structure and high internal consistency. Method. We designed two studies. In the first study, 610 participants responded to eight items where the central term (intelligence) was replaced by the term ``gavagai''. In the second study, 548 participants responded to seven items whose content was totally invented. We asked the participants if they gave any meaning to ``gavagai'', and conducted analyses aimed at uncovering the most suitable structure for modeling responses to meaningless items. Results. In the first study, 81.3% of the sample gave ``gavagai'' meaning, while 18.7% showed they had given it no interpretation. The factorial structures of the two groups were very different from each other. In the second study, the factorial model fitted almost perfectly. However, further analysis revealed that the structure of the data was not continuous but categorical with three unordered classes very similar to midpoint, disacquiescent, and random response styles. Discussion. Apparently good psychometric properties on meaningless scales may be due to (a) respondents actually giving an interpretation to the item and responding according to that interpretation, or (b) a false positive because the statistical fit of the factorial model is not sensitive to cases where the actual structure of the data does not come from a common factor. In conclusion, the problem is not in factor analysis, but in the ability of the researcher to elaborate substantive hypotheses about the structure of the data, to employ analytical procedures congruent with those hypotheses, and to understand that a good fit in factor analysis does not have a univocal interpretation and is not sufficient evidence of either validity nor good psychometric properties.
    URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/10366/154083
    DOI
    10.7717/peerj.10209
    Versión del editor
    http://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.10209
    Aparece en las colecciones
    • DPETP. Artículos del Departamento de Personalidad, Evaluación y Tratamiento Psicológicos [263]
    Mostrar el registro completo del ítem
    Ficheros en el ítem
    Nombre:
    DPETP_AriasGonzálezVB_Valid reliable.pdf
    Tamaño:
    1.677Mb
    Formato:
    Adobe PDF
    Thumbnail
    Visualizar/Abrir
     
    Universidad de Salamanca
    AVISO LEGAL Y POLÍTICA DE PRIVACIDAD
    2024 © UNIVERSIDAD DE SALAMANCA
     
    Universidad de Salamanca
    AVISO LEGAL Y POLÍTICA DE PRIVACIDAD
    2024 © UNIVERSIDAD DE SALAMANCA