Talk:Predictive validity

The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

Psychology

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Statistics Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Statistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of statistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.StatisticsWikipedia:WikiProject StatisticsTemplate:WikiProject StatisticsStatistics
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

The just-added section on significance correlations equaling predictive validity

For example, the validity of a cognitive test for job performance is the correlation between test scores and, for example, supervisor performance ratings. Such a cognitive test would have predictive validity if the observed correlation were statistically significant.

I'll see if I can dig up a reference, but statistical significance is not enough for this aspect of validity because a statistically significant correlation only indicates a non-zero relationship. A tiny correlation can still be significant, though not necessarily sufficient to support an instrument's predictive validity. (E.g. A racial profiling instrument would be "predicatively valid" for predicting SAT scores, criminal record, and a host of other things.)

R^2 (percentage of variance explained) is a better indicator of the strength of the relationship. If I can't find a ref on the methodology, I'll ignore it.

Nevermind... Someone took care of it.

Jmbrowne (talk) 15:56, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]