NotesFAQContact Us
Collection
Advanced
Search Tips
ERIC Number: ED314440
Record Type: Non-Journal
Publication Date: 1989-Nov
Pages: 21
Abstractor: N/A
Reference Count: N/A
ISBN: N/A
ISSN: N/A
Three Methods of Cross-Validation: Is There a Difference in Conclusions?
Schmitt, Dorren Rafael
Invariance procedures have been known for over three decades. Through the years, these procedures have not been widely used by researchers. One reason for the lack of use is that most of the articles on invariance procedures have been mathematically oriented. This mathematical orientation and the lack of mathematical background on the part of most educational researchers have inhibited the use of generalizability procedures. Generalizability procedures are important in educational research due to the frequency of researchers needing to use small sample sizes. Problems with the use of small samples are compounded by the frequent use of statistical techniques that capitalize on chance. This paper briefly discusses the history of invariance procedures. A discussion of three methods of cross-validation and illustrations for regression are also presented. The three methods are standard cross-validation, double cross-validation, and Gollob's procedure. These procedures can be performed with univariate as well as multivariate statistical procedures. It is contended that, if the researcher cannot use an independent sample, either standard cross-validation or Gollob's procedure would produce the same results. Unless the sample has less than 30 cases, use of standard cross-validation is recommended. Six data tables are provided. (Author/TJH)
Publication Type: Reports - Evaluative; Speeches/Meeting Papers
Education Level: N/A
Audience: N/A
Language: English
Sponsor: N/A
Authoring Institution: N/A