• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

关于笔迹分析的有效性:对克伦baugh回复的回应

On the validity of graphoanalysis: a rejoinder to Crumbaugh's Reply.

作者信息

Vestewig R E, Moss M K

机构信息

Department of Psychology, Wright State University, Dayton, Ohio 45435, USA.

出版信息

J Pers Assess. 1977 Dec;41(6):589-90. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa4106_2.

DOI:10.1207/s15327752jpa4106_2
PMID:16367190
Abstract

Crumbaugh (1977) reexamines an earlier study showing no validity for graphoanalysis (Vestewig, Santee, & Moss, 1976), and from considerations of the methodology and from reanalysis of the data findings some validity for the system. This rejoinder points out conceptual and statistical errors in his reply, and reaffirms the conclusion of the earlier study.

摘要

克伦baugh(1977年)重新审视了一项早期研究,该研究表明笔迹分析无效(韦斯特维格、桑蒂和莫斯,1976年),并从方法论的角度以及对数据的重新分析中发现该系统具有一定的有效性。这一回应指出了他回复中的概念性和统计性错误,并重申了早期研究的结论。

相似文献

1
On the validity of graphoanalysis: a rejoinder to Crumbaugh's Reply.关于笔迹分析的有效性:对克伦baugh回复的回应
J Pers Assess. 1977 Dec;41(6):589-90. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa4106_2.
2
A reply to "Validity and student acceptance of a graphoanalytic approach to personality" by Vestewig, Santee, and Moss.
J Pers Assess. 1977 Aug;41(4):351-2. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa4104_3.
3
Comparison of Graphoanalysis with House Method in Prediction of Complete Denture Patient's Mental Attitude: A Prospective Comparative Study.
J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2013 Mar;13(1):24-9. doi: 10.1007/s13191-012-0155-4. Epub 2012 Jul 19.
4
An illustration of issues in factor extraction and identification of dimensionality in psychological assessment data.心理评估数据中因素提取和维度识别问题的一个示例。
J Pers Assess. 2006 Jun;86(3):263-72. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa8603_03.
5
Advancing scientific discourse in the controversy surrounding the Comprehensive System for the Rorschach: a rejoinder to Meyer (2000).
J Pers Assess. 2001 Jun;76(3):369-78. doi: 10.1207/S15327752JPA7603_01.
6
Construct and content validity of the Separation-Individuation Test of Adolescence: a reply to Levine.青少年分离个体化测试的结构效度和内容效度:对莱文的回应
J Pers Assess. 1994 Feb;62(1):169-72. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa6201_16.
7
How to assess the external validity of therapeutic trials: a conceptual approach.如何评估治疗试验的外部有效性:概念方法。
Int J Epidemiol. 2010 Feb;39(1):89-94. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyp174. Epub 2009 Apr 17.
8
Is the oral health impact profile measuring up? Investigating the scale's construct validity using structural equation modelling.口腔健康影响概况评估达标了吗?使用结构方程模型研究该量表的结构效度。
Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2008 Dec;36(6):532-41. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0528.2008.00440.x. Epub 2008 Sep 8.
9
One measure does not a construct make: directions toward reinvigorating psychopathy research--reply to Hare and Neumann (2010).一测量不构成一建构:重振精神变态研究的方向——回应 Hare 和 Neumann(2010)。
Psychol Assess. 2010 Jun;22(2):455-9. doi: 10.1037/a0014862.
10
Additivity, subadditivity, and the use of visual information: a reply to Massaro (1988).
J Exp Psychol Gen. 1988 Dec;117(4):422-4.