Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
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
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 Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Tubbs, M. E.
Right arrow Articles by James-Valutis, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Tubbs, M. E.
Right arrow Articles by James-Valutis, M.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 18, No. 2, 231-236 (1992)
DOI: 10.1177/0146167292182015
© 1992 Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.

Indirect Measures of Causal Dimensions: Estimating the Reliability of a Composite of Separate Constructs

Mark E. Tubbs

University of Missouri-St. Louis

Marsha James-Valutis

University of Missouri-St. Louis

In 1987, Russell, McAuley, and Tarico examined the reliability of both indirect and direct measures of causal dimensions (i.e., stability, controllability, and locus of causality). Their results indicated that the reliability of indirect measures was unacceptably low and much worse than the reliability of Russell's directly measured Causal Dimension Scale. The purpose of the present study was to demonstrate that Russell and associates misconceptualized the nature of the constructs assessed in the indirect measures and, as a result, grossly underestimated their reliabilities. Findings indicated that, when properly conceptualized and analyzed, indirect measures are at least as reliable as direct measures.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?