Thurstone and Guttman Scaling of Job Related Technical Skills

Siegel, Arthur I.; Schultz, Douglas G.

doi:10.2466/pr0.1962.10.3.855

Cited by 3 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Messick and Abelson (19S7) reviewed several scaling methods, among which was Guttman scale analysis. Siegel and Schultz (1962) found that both the Guttman and Thurstone methods were workable. Siegmann (1960), however, found the Guttman technique inadequate for determining whether a set of items was homogeneous in content.…”

Section: Other Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Application of scaling techniques to the evaluation of counseling outcomes.

Farnsworth¹

1966

Psychological Bulletin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A reasonably comprehensive review of the literature has revealed largely inadequate attempts to evaluate counseling, due chiefly to improper criterion development. A consolidation of various criterion issues reveals that multiple criteria and some combination of the other types of criteria discussed are most promising for application in research. A consolidation of scaling issues emphasizes multiple ratings, the closing gap between physical and psychological continua, and the improper use of theoretical definitions for criterion development. A review of rating scales covering the last 20 years reveals a general implementation of relevant criterion issues, but little attention to relevant scaling issues. It is concluded that each phase of rating scale development demands proper scaling techniques. Those suggested are (a) factor analysis and (b) multidimensional scaling analysis. Other scaling methods are discussed, and item construction and analysis are developed briefly.

show abstract

Section: Other Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A cue to the future of scaling has been given by Siegel and Schultz (1962): "The finding of task scalability seems to ... provide a basis for the construction of short, convenient job performance evaluation instruments [p. 861]."…”

Section: Multidimensional Scaling Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Application of scaling techniques to the evaluation of counseling outcomes.

Farnsworth¹

1966

Psychological Bulletin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Delineation of the basic dimensions of a job would serve a number of important purposes. Once the characteristics of the job performance dimensions are known, it should be possible to build unidimensional performance criterion instruments, scaled according to the Thurstone and/or Guttman requirements, by methods previously developed (Schultz & Siegel, 1961;Siegel & Schultz, 1962). Unidimensional, scaled instruments of this type would be useful for the evaluation of the job performance of individuals.…”

Section: Relevance Of Multidimensional Scaling Methods For Job Perfor...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Three previous studies (Richlin, Siegel, & Schultz, 1960;Schultz & Siegel, 1961;Siegel & Schultz, 1962) had delineated the tasks performed by technicians at this level. Starting from this base of experience, a tentative list was prepared in accordance with the requirements described above.…”

Section: Multidimensional Scaling Formmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On the one hand, several recent studies by the authors (Schultz & Siegel, 1961;Siegel & Schultz, 1962) have centered on the utility of the Thurstone and Guttman scaling techniques in the construction of job performance criterion instruments. Since the scaled check lists which were devised provide a practical and efficient method for personnel evaluation, it seemed reasonable to examine the possible contributions of other aspects of scaling methodology, particularly with reference to the important area of criterion dimensionality.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation