Carretta Thomas R, Ree Malcolm James
Air Force Research Laboratory, Airman Biosciences Division, Performance Optimization Branch, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio.
Organizational Leadership, Our Lady of the Lake University, San Antonio, Texas.
Mil Psychol. 2022 Mar 1;34(5):551-569. doi: 10.1080/08995605.2021.2022067. eCollection 2022.
Data are often available only for recruits, a range-restricted sample. This creates the potential for mistaken inferences and poor decisions. This is because inferences and decisions are about the population, not the sample. Despite these problems, researchers must try to determine statistical values as if the sample was not range-restricted. Although range restriction correction methods have been available for over a century, often they are not applied or are applied incorrectly. Technical psychometric discussions of range restriction have not improved researcher practice. As an alternative, realistic scenarios are presented to illustrate and explain the consequences of (1) failing to correct correlations, (2) using the wrong correction formula, (3) correcting when information about previous selection variables is unavailable, (4) using an inappropriate unrestricted sample, (5) incorrectly computing the confidence interval for corrected correlations, and (6) interpretation of results. Although there are situations under which correction has little effect, correction still provides better estimates of relations among variables. It also improves theoretical understanding and interpretation of real-world results.
数据通常仅适用于招募对象,即一个范围受限的样本。这就产生了错误推断和决策失误的可能性。这是因为推断和决策是针对总体,而非样本。尽管存在这些问题,但研究人员必须尝试确定统计值,就好像样本没有范围限制一样。尽管范围限制校正方法已经存在了一个多世纪,但它们常常未被应用或应用错误。关于范围限制的技术心理测量学讨论并未改善研究人员的实践。作为替代方案,本文呈现了一些现实场景,以说明和解释以下情况的后果:(1)未校正相关性,(2)使用错误的校正公式,(3)在没有关于先前选择变量的信息时进行校正,(4)使用不适当的无限制样本,(5)错误计算校正相关性的置信区间,以及(6)结果解释。尽管在某些情况下校正效果甚微,但校正仍能提供对变量间关系的更好估计。它还能增进对现实世界结果的理论理解和解释。