Suppose a collection of standard tests is given to all subjects in a random sample, but a different new test is given to each group of subjects in nonoverlapping subsamples. A simple method is developed for displaying the information that the data set contains about the correlational structure of the new tests. This is possible to some extent, even though each subject takes only one new test. The method uses plausible values of the partial correlations among the new tests given the standard tests in order to generate plausible simple correlations among the new tests and plausible multiple correlations between composites of the new tests and the standard tests. The real data example included suggests that the method can be useful in practical problems.

The relationship between variables in applied and experimental research is often investigated by the use of extreme (i.e., upper and lower) groups. Recent analytical work has provided an extreme groups procedure that is more powerful than the standard correlational approach for all values of the correlation and extreme group size. The present article provides procedures to optimize power by determining the relative number of subjects to use in each of two stages of data collection given a fixed testing budget.

For ordinal measurement the concept of an individual propensity distribution is developed. For any given individual the mean of this distribution is his true score, for which estimation procedures are discussed. Two measures of individual dispersion are considered and their distributions derived in the null case. These measures are shown to be counterparts at the individual level of Kendall’s tau and Spearman’s rho. Estimation of the two dispersion measures from sample data is investigated, and the relation of these estimates to the variance of the individual propensity distribution is derived.

The problem of comparing two sociometric matrices, as originally discussed by Katz and Powell in the early 1950’s, is reconsidered and generalized using a different inference model. In particular, the proposed indices of conformity are justified by a regression argument similar to the one used by Somers in presenting his well-known measures of asymmetric ordinal association. A permutation distribution and an associated significance test are developed for the specific hypothesis of “no conformity” reinterpreted as a random matching of the rows and (simultaneously) the columns of one sociometric matrix to the rows and columns of a second. The approximate significance tests that are presented and illustrated with a simple numerical example are based on the first two moments of the permutation distribution, or alternatively, on a random sample from the complete distribution.

A multiple-answer multiple-choice test item has a certain number of alternatives, any number of which might be keyed. The examinee is also allowed to mark any number of alternatives. This increased flexibility over the one keyed alternative case is useful in practice but raises questions about appropriate scoring rules. In this article a certain class of item scoring rules called the binary class is considered. The concepts of standard scoring rules and equivalence among these scoring rules are introduced in the “misinformation” model for which the traditional “knowledge” model is a special case. The examinee’s strategy with respect to a scoring rule is examined. The critical role of a quantity called the scoring ratio is emphasized. In the case of examinee uncertainty about the number of correct alternatives on an item, a Bayes and a minimax strategy for the examinee are developed. Also an appropriate response for the examiner to the minimax strategy is outlined.

A monotone invariant method of hierarchical clustering based on the Mann-Whitney U-statistic is presented. The effectiveness of the complete-link, single-link, and U-statistic methods in recovering tree structures from error perturbed data are evaluated. The U-statistic method is found to be consistently more effective in recovering the original tree structures than either the single-link or complete-link methods.

This paper develops a unified approach, based on ranks, to the statistical analysis of data arising from complex experimental designs. In this way we answer a major objection to the use of rank procedures as a major methodology in data analysis. We show that the rank procedures, including testing, estimation and multiple comparisons, are generated in a natural way from a robust measure of scale. The rank methods closely parallel the familiar methods of least squares, so that estimates and tests have natural interpretations.

The “Traveling Salesman” and similar combinatorial programming tasks encountered in operations research are discussed as possible data analysis models in psychology, for example, in developmental scaling, Guttman scaling, profile smoothing, and data array clustering. In addition, a short overview of the various computational approaches from this area of combinatorial optimization is included.

An observer is to make inference statements about a quantity p, called a propensity and bounded between 0 and 1, based on the observation that p does or does not exceed a constant c. The propensity p may have an interpretation as a proportion, as a long-run relative frequency, or as a personal probability held by some subject. Applications in medicine, engineering, political science, and, most especially, human decision making are indicated. Bayes solutions for the observer are obtained based on prior distributions in the mixture of beta distribution family; these are then specialized to power-function prior distributions. Inference about log p and log odds is considered. Multiple-action problems are considered in which the focus of inference shifts to the process generating the propensities p, both in the case of a process parameter π known to the subject and unknown. Empirical Bayes techniques are developed for observer inference about c when π is known to the subject. A Bayes rule, a minimax rule and a beta-minimax rule are constructed for the subject when he is uncertain about π.

It is shown that the common and unique variance estimates produced by Martin & McDonald’s Bayesian estimation procedure for the unrestricted common factor model have a predictable sum which is always greater than the maximum likelihood estimate of the total variance. This fact is used to justify a suggested simple alternative method of specifying the Bayesian parameters required by the procedure.

An examination is made concerning the utility and design of studies comparing nonmetric scaling algorithms and their initial configurations, as well as the agreement between the results of such studies. Various practical details of nonmetric scaling are also considered.

In response to Arabie several random ranking studies are compared and discussed. Differences are typically very small, however it is noted that those studies which used arbitrary configurations tend to produce slightly higher stress values. The choice of starting configuration is discussed and we suggest that the use of a principal components decomposition of the doubly centered matrix of dissimilarities, or some transformation thereof, will yield an initial configuration which is superior to a randomly chosen one.

A relationship is given between the joint common factor structure of two sets of variables, and the factor structure of the partial covariance matrix of one of the sets with the other partialled out.

As the literature indicates, no method is presently available which takes explicitly into account that the parameters of Lazarsfeld's latent class analysis are defined as probabilities and are therefore restricted to the interval [0, 1]. In the present paper an appropriate transform on the parameters is performed in order to satisfy this constraint, and the estimation of the transformed parameters according to the maximum likelihood principle is outlined. In the sequel, a numerical example is given for which the basis solution and the usual maximum likelihood method failed. The different results are compared and the advantages of the proposed method discussed.

Using variance stabilizing transformations, this note describes approximate solutions to the ranking and selection problem of selecting the best binomial population or the bivariate normal population with the largest correlation coefficient.

A goodness of fit test presented by Andersen is shown to be incorrect. The correct test is described and a re-analysis of Andersen's data is provided.

A general method of devising stepwise multiple testing procedures with fixed experimentwise error is applied to the problem of non-parametric randomized block design with ordered alternatives. In addition, the method is applied to other models with ordered alternatives.