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

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
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 Cota, A. A.
Right arrow Articles by Fekken, G. C.
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?

Comparing Different Methods for Implementing Parallel Analysis: A Practical Index of Accuracy

Albert A. Cota

Joyceville Institution

R. Stewart Longman

Queen's University

Ronald R. Holden

Queen's University

G. Cynthia Fekken

Queen's University

Of the various methods and rules-of-thumb for deciding the 4correct" number of components to retain in principal components analysis, parallel analysis is arguably the most useful. Recently, researchers have become interested in developing alternative methods of implementing parallel analysis and of comparing their accuracy. The accuracy of three methods of implementing parallel analysis with mean eigenvalues (regression, interpolation, and computation with three samples of random data) was compared. The index of accuracy was the proportion of agreement on the number of components for extraction suggested by each of these three procedures and those suggested by implementing parallel analysis with 40 runs of random data, in a sample of 28 published correlation matrices. Moreover, the accuracy of two methods of implementing parallel analysis with 95th percentile eigenvalues (regression and interpolation) was compared using the aforementioned index of accuracy. In separate analyses for mean and 95th percentile eigenvalue strategies, no evidence of differential accuracy emerged. Implications for implementing parallel analysis are discussed.

Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 53, No. 4, 865-876 (1993)
DOI: 10.1177/0013164493053004001
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
 AssessmentHome page
R. R. McCrae, T. A. Martin, and P. T. Costa Jr.
Age Trends and Age Norms for the NEO Personality Inventory-3 in Adolescents and Adults
Assessment, December 1, 2005; 12(4): 363 - 373.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Criminal Justice and BehaviorHome page
W. LOZA, G. DHALIWAL, D. G. KRONER, and A. LOZA-FANOUS
Reliability, Construct, and Concurrent Validities of the Self-Appraisal Questionnaire: A Tool for Assessing Violent and Nonviolent Recidivism
Criminal Justice and Behavior, June 1, 2000; 27(3): 356 - 374.
[Abstract] [PDF]