PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Gregory J Meyer

Publications and source records attributed to Gregory J Meyer.

11 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

When effect sizes disagree: the case of r and d.

The increased use of effect sizes in single studies and meta-analyses raises new questions about statistical inference. Choice of an effect-size index can have a substantial impact on the interpretation of findings. The authors demonstrate the issue by focusing on two popular effect-size measures, the correlation coefficient and the standardized mean difference (e.g., Cohen's d or Hedges's g), both of which can be used when one variable is dichotomous and the other is quantitative. Although the indices are often practically interchangeable, differences in sensitivity to the base rate or variance of the dichotomous variable can alter conclusions about the magnitude of an effect depending on which statistic is used. Because neither statistic is universally superior, researchers should explicitly consider the importance of base rates to formulate correct inferences and justify the selection of a primary effect-size statistic.

Data Interpretation, Statistical↗
PubMed2005

The interclinician reliability of Rorschach interpretation in four data sets.

To examine agreement on Rorschach Comprehensive System (CS; Exner, 2004) interpretations, 55 patient protocols were interpreted by 3 to 8 clinicians across 4 data sets on a representative set of 29 characteristics. Substantial reliability was observed across data sets, although a problematic design produced lower results in one. Unexpectedly, a Q-sort task had slightly lower reliability than a simple rating task. As expected, scales that summarized judgments had higher agreement than judgments to individual interpretive statements, and some clinicians produced more generalizable inferences than others. Interpretations for all clinicians were more strongly associated with patients' psychometric true scores (aggregated judgment M range = .82 to .92) than with the judgments of other clinicians (range = .76 to .89). Compared to meta-analyses of interrater reliability in psychology and medicine, the findings indicate these clinicians could reliably interpret Rorschach CS data.

Adult↗
PubMed2003

The incremental validity of psychological testing and assessment: conceptual, methodological, and statistical issues.

There has been insufficient effort in most areas of applied psychology to evaluate incremental validity. To further this kind of validity research, the authors examined applicable research designs, including those to assess the incremental validity of test instruments, of test-informed clinical inferences, and of newly developed measures. The authors also considered key statistical and measurement issues that can influence incremental validity findings, including the entry order of predictor variables, how to interpret the size of a validity increment, and possible artifactual effects in the criteria selected for incremental validity research. The authors concluded by suggesting steps for building a cumulative research base concerning incremental validity and by describing challenges associated with applying nomothetic research findings to individual clinical cases.

Humans↗
PubMed2003

Correspondence among observer ratings of Rorschach, Big Five Model, and DSM-IV personality disorder constructs.

Observer ratings were collected using instruments designed to measure the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed.; American Psychiatric Association, 1994) personality disorders (Personality Diagnostic Questionnaire-4+ [PDQ-4+]; Hyler, 1994), the Big Five model (B5M; Goldberg's [1999] International Personality Item Pool), and Rorschach-derived constructs. For the latter, we revised the Rorschach Rating Scale (Meyer, Bates, & Gacono, 1999) to lower its reading level and renamed it the Rorschach Construct Scale (RCS) to emphasize its reliance on rated constructs. The RCS consists of 6 factors. Joint factor analysis of RCS, PDQ-4+, and B5M items also resulted in 6 factors: Self-Centeredly Exploitative, Poor Ego Resiliency, Extraversion, Task Conscientiousness, Openness to Ideas, and Emotional and Expressive Constriction. The first 2 factors received high loadings from RCS, PDQ-4+, and B5M variables. The sixth factor received high loadings from just RCS variables.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

Exploring possible ethnic differences and bias in the Rorschach Comprehensive System.

In this study I conducted a series of analyses to explore potential ethnic bias in Rorschach Comprehensive System variables using a consecutive series of 432 patients evaluated in 1 setting. The simple association between 188 scores and ethnicity revealed no significant findings after matching on several salient demographic variables. Next, 17 analyses of convergent validity found no evidence for differential validity and no evidence for slope bias. For 13 analyses, there was also no evidence for intercept bias. However, with 4 variables predicting psychotic disorders, regression lines favored minorities and worked against European Americans. These findings are the opposite of what should be seen if the Rorschach was biased against minorities and most likely emerged for statistical reasons related to unmeasured confounds. Finally, principal components analyses revealed no evidence of ethnic bias in the Rorschach's internal structure. Although these findings need to be replicated, the available data support using the Comprehensive System across ethnic groups.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

An examination of interrater reliability for scoring the Rorschach Comprehensive System in eight data sets.

In this article, we describe interrater reliability for the Comprehensive System (CS; Exner. 1993) in 8 relatively large samples, including (a) students, (b) experienced re- searchers, (c) clinicians, (d) clinicians and then researchers, (e) a composite clinical sample (i.e., a to d), and 3 samples in which randomly generated erroneous scores were substituted for (f) 10%, (g) 20%, or (h) 30% of the original responses. Across samples, 133 to 143 statistically stable CS scores had excellent reliability, with median intraclass correlations of.85, .96, .97, .95, .93, .95, .89, and .82, respectively. We also demonstrate reliability findings from this study closely match the results derived from a synthesis of prior research, CS summary scores are more reliable than scores assigned to individual responses, small samples are more likely to generate unstable and lower reliability estimates, and Meyer's (1997a) procedures for estimating response segment reliability were accurate. The CS can be scored reliably, but because scoring is the result of coder skills clinicians must conscientiously monitor their accuracy.

Adult↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Construct validity of rorschach variables for alexithymia.

The construct validity of Rorschach Comprehensive System (CS) variables theoretically linked to alexithymia was evaluated in 92 outpatients with inflammatory bowel disease, 32 of whom were categorized as alexithymic, 15 as indeterminate-alexithymic, and 45 as nonalexithymic, on the basis of Toronto Alexithymia Scale scores. Six sets of Rorschach CS marker variables were selected for analysis: fantasy, affect, adaptive resources, cognition, social adaptation, and projection. Most variables significantly differentiated the three groups. Compared with the other groups, alexithymic subjects were more likely to show an impoverished fantasy life, poorly adapted emotional expression, poor coping resources, concrete and stereotypical thinking, and social conformity with compromised relationships.

Adult↗