Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-b6zl4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-08T10:08:18.670Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Factor Analytic Method for Investigating Differences between Groups of Individual Learning Curves

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2025

R. A. Weitzman
R. A. Weitzman*
Affiliation:
Bar-Ilan University, Israel
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this method of analyzing learning data, entire learning curves are described quantitatively by single numbers which are used in a statistical test to determine whether two or more groups of learning curves are significantly different. The method has some logical advantages over prevailing methods in that it avoids the use of average learning curves and of arbitrary measures of slope and asymptote. Its disadvantage is computational. Since it involves the use of factor analytic procedures, it may be tedious to apply unless computation is carried out on a high-speed computer.

Type
Original Paper
Information
Psychometrika , Volume 28 , Issue 1 , March 1963 , pp. 69 - 80
Copyright
Copyright © 1963 The Psychometric Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

This investigation was begun and carried out for the most part while the author was a Psychometric Fellow of Educational Testing Service at Princeton University. It was completed at University College, London, during successive tenures of post-doctoral fellowships from The National Institute of Mental Health, U.S.P.H.S., and The National Science Foundation. Data for the numerical example were processed by the high-speed computer facilities of the Western Data Processing Center, Los Angeles.

†

Presently at Los Angeles State College

References

Bush, R. R. and Wilson, T. R. Two-choice behavior of the paradise fish. J. exp. Psychol., 1956, 51, 315–322.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Day, B. B. and Sandomire, M. M. Use of the discriminant function for more than two groups. J. Amer. statist. Ass., 1942, 37, 461–472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eckart, C. and Young, G. The approximation of one matrix by another of lower rank. Psychometrika, 1936, 1, 211–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, R. A. The use of multiple measurements in taxonomic problems. Ann. Eugenics, 1936, 7, 179–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gardner, R. A. Probability learning in two and three choice situations. Dissertation Abstr., 1954, 14, 1820–1821.Google Scholar
Gulliksen, H. Mathematical solutions for psychological problems, Princeton: Princeton Univ. and Educ. Test. Serv., 1958.Google Scholar
Hilgard, E. R. A summary and evaluation of alternative procedures for the construction of Vincent curves. Psychol. Bull., 1938, 35, 282–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoel, P. G. Introduction to mathematical statistics, New York: Wiley, 1947.Google Scholar
Householder, A. S. and Young, G. Matrix approximation and latent roots. Amer. math. Monthly, 1938, 45, 165–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kendall, M. G. A course in multivariate analysis, New York: Hafner, 1957.Google Scholar
Merrell, M. The relationship of individual growth to average growth. Hum. Biology, 1931, 3, 37–40.Google Scholar
Rao, C. R. Some statistical methods for comparison of growth curves. Biometrics, 1958, 14, 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siegel, S. Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences, New York: McGraw-Hill, 1956.Google Scholar
Thurstone, L. L. Multiple-factor analysis, Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press, 1947.Google Scholar
Tucker, L. R. Determination of parameters of a functional relation by factor analysis. Psychometrika, 1958, 23, 19–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tucker, L. R. Determination of generalized learning curves by factor analysis, Princeton: Princeton Univ. and Educ. Test. Serv., 1960.Google Scholar
Weitzman, R. A. A comparison of the performance of rats and fish on a probabilistic, discriminative learning problem, Princeton: Princeton Univ. and Educ. Test. Serv., 1959.Google Scholar