Talk:Predictive validity

	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 articles
???	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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

The just-added section on significance correlations equaling predictive validity edit

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

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

Add topic