Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Educational and 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 Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Schnittjer, C. J.
Right arrow Articles by Showalter, B. L.
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?

Canonical Correlation Programs: a Comparative Analysis of Performance

Carl J. Schnittjer

University of Georgia

Benjamin L. Showalter

University of Alabama, Birmingham

This study was designed to compare and contrast generally available computer programs which provide canonical correlation analysis. The same set of data was analyzed by each of four canonical correlation programs. The four programs compared came from the Biomedical Computer Programs (BMD), Miami Multivariate Statistical Programs (Miami), Statistical Analysis System (SAS), and Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). Following the analyses detailed comparisons were tabulated using the following criteria: (1) Run Characteristics, (2) Limitations, and (3) Analysis Features and Options. The newer programs (i.e., SPSS CANCORR and SAS CANCORR) tended to have more features and greater versatility. However, each program had certain uniquenesses which might make it more nearly appropriate for a given analysis requirement.

Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 36, No. 1, 179-182 (1976)
DOI: 10.1177/001316447603600120
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?