Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

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.
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
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 Huberty, C. J.
Right arrow Articles by Holmes, S. E.
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?

Two-Group Comparisons and Univariate Classification

Carl J. Huberty

University of Georgia

Susan E. Holmes

University of Georgia

An alternative analysis of the traditional two-group single response variable design is discussed. The proposed analysis involves the classification, or assignment, of experimental units to populations represented by the two groups. Methods of estimating probabilities of correct classification are discussed. Three real data sets are provided to illustrate the utility of a classification analysis in describing both group as well as individual differences. A table of sample sizes required to yield estimates of probabilities of correct classification within a given tolerance of optimum probabilities is presented. Operational definitions of "substantive significance" are proposed.

Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 43, No. 1, 15-26 (1983)
DOI: 10.1177/001316448304300103
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
 Educational and Psychological MeasurementHome page
P. Natesan and B. Thompson
Extending Improvement-Over-Chance I-Index Effect Size Simulation Studies to Cover Some Small-Sample Cases
Educational and Psychological Measurement, February 1, 2007; 67(1): 59 - 72.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Educational and Psychological MeasurementHome page
C. J Huberty
A History of Effect Size Indices
Educational and Psychological Measurement, April 1, 2002; 62(2): 227 - 240.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Educational and Psychological MeasurementHome page
B. Hess, S. Olejnik, and C. J Huberty
The Efficacy of two Improvement-Over-Chance Effect Sizes for Two-Group Univariate Comparisons under Variance Heterogeneity and Nonnormality
Educational and Psychological Measurement, December 1, 2001; 61(6): 909 - 936.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Educational and Psychological MeasurementHome page
C. J Huberty and L. L. Lowman
Group Overlap as a Basis for Effect Size
Educational and Psychological Measurement, August 1, 2000; 60(4): 543 - 563.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Educational and Psychological MeasurementHome page
D. J. German and D. R. Glasnapp
The Test of Word-Finding in Discourse: Diagnostic Utility Evidence
Educational and Psychological Measurement, June 1, 1990; 50(2): 383 - 392.
[Abstract]

Home page
 EDUCATIONAL RESEARCHERHome page
C. J. HUBERTY
On Statistical Testing
Educational Researcher, November 1, 1987; 16(8): 4 - 9.
[Abstract] [PDF]