Cross Validated Asked by user136083 on February 10, 2021
I am working with a psychometric test of future orientation/prospection and looking at repeat measures within-subject, tested twice across 3-4 years.
I’ve read that Pearson’s r would be suitable if the data are normal, though my Wilks Shapiro stats strongly suggest non-normality.
Do you have any advice for test-retest with non-normal data? Would a log transform be appropriate (and rechecking normality first)?
Pearson's $r$, as well as other correlation coefficients, are popular choices for assessing retest reliability, but they aren't very good ones. The problem is that correlation coefficients, by design, adjust for differences between the variables such as additive bias and rescaling. When you're looking at retest reliability, on the other hand, you want to check to what extent the test gives the same scores between administrations, as opposed to merely correlated scores. So you're best off with something like root mean squared error or mean absolute error. Having data that isn't normally distributed, by the way, isn't an issue for either of these.
Answered by Kodiologist on February 10, 2021
Get help from others!
Recent Questions
Recent Answers
© 2024 TransWikia.com. All rights reserved. Sites we Love: PCI Database, UKBizDB, Menu Kuliner, Sharing RPP