Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

THIS (METHOD) IS (NOT) FINE

  • Jelte M. Wicherts (a1)

Summary

In their response to my criticism of their recent article in Journal of Biosocial Science (te Nijenhuis et al., 2017), te Nijenhuis and van den Hoek (2018) raise four points none of which concerns my main point that the method of correlated vectors (MCV) applied to item-level data represents a flawed method. Here, I discuss te Nijenhuis and van den Hoek’s four points. First, I argue that my previous application of MCV to item-level data showed that the method can yield nonsensical results. Second, I note that meta-analytic corrections for sampling error, imperfect measures, restriction of range and unreliability of the vectors are futile and cannot help fix the method. Third, I note that even with perfect data, the method can yield negative correlations. Fourth, I highlight the irrelevance of te Nijenhuis and van den Hoek (2018)’s point that my comment had not been published in a peerreviewed journal by referring to my articles in 2009 and 2017 on MCV in peer-reviewed journals.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      THIS (METHOD) IS (NOT) FINE
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      THIS (METHOD) IS (NOT) FINE
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      THIS (METHOD) IS (NOT) FINE
      Available formats
      ×

Copyright

This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the same Creative Commons licence is included and the original work is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use.

Corresponding author

References

Hide All
Hunter, J. E. & Schmidt, F. L. (2004) Methods of Meta-Analysis: Correcting Error and Bias in Research Findings, 2nd edition. Sage, London.
Kan, K. J., Wicherts, J. M., Dolan, C. V. & Van Der Maas, H. L. (2013) On the nature and nurture of intelligence and specific cognitive abilities: the more heritable, the more culture dependent. Psychological Science 24(12), 24202428.
Schönemann, P. H. (1997) Famous artifacts: Spearman’s hypothesis. Cahiers de Psychologie Cognitive 16, 665694.
te Nijenhuis, J., Batterjee, A. A., van den Hoek, M., Allik, J. & Sukhanovskiy, V. (2017) Spearman’s hypothesis testing comparing Saudi Arabian children and adolescents with various other groups of children and adolescents on the items of the Standard Progressive Matrices. Journal of Biosocial Science 49, 634647.
te Nijenhuis, J. & van den Hoek, M. (2018) Analysing group differences in intelligence using the psychometric meta-analytic-method of correlated vectors hybrid model: a reply to Wicherts (2018) attacking a strawman. Journal of Biosocial Science, doi:10.1017/S0021932018000160.
Wicherts, J. M. (2017) Psychometric problems with the method of correlated vectors applied to item scores (including some nonsensical results). Intelligence 60, 2638.
Wicherts, J. M. & Johnson, W. (2009) Group differences in the heritability of items and test scores. Proceedings of the Royal Society: Series B 276, 26752683.

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed