Category Archives: General facts/hypotheses

Report the finding and testing of general facts

Retest change at the questionnaire item “Love to think up new ways of doing things”

A sample Ω108 of 108 French adults (mean age = 36.69, SD = 15.41, 54 males) took part in a survey which consisted of answering questionnaire items twice. The time lapse between the test and the retest ranged from three to five weeks.

The questionnaire item “J’adore élaborer de nouvelles façons de faire les choses” (Love to think up new ways of doing things) from the International Personality Item Pool (IPIP, Goldberg et al., 2006) was used along with a 5-point Likert scale from “Very Inaccurate” (coded 1) to “Very Accurate” (coded 5). Thus, the descriptive variable XΩ108 -> M(X), where M(X) = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5}2 = {(1, 1), (1, 2), …, (5, 5)}.

Values of the subset {(5, 1), (5, 2), (5, 3)} describe no respondents although 30 respondents chosen the value 5 at the test.

An interpretation is that respondents who chosen the value 5 at the test remembered an example of being engaged in thinking up new ways of doing something with positive feelings (event M), and that when one is able to remember such an experience (test event M∧5), one is able to retrieve a similar memory at the retest, which precludes the judgements “Very Inaccurate”, “Inaccurate”, or “Neutral” (retest event M∧(4∨5)).

For that interpretation to be an explanation, it has to have a falsifier. The test-retest event (M∧5)∧¬[M∧(4∨5)] is a falsifier.

Reference

Goldberg, L. R., Johnson, J. A., Eber, H. W., Hogan, R., Ashton, M. C., Cloninger, C. R., & Gough, H. C. (2006). The International Personality Item Pool and the future of public-domain personality measures. Journal of Personality Research, 40, 84-96.

Retest change at the questionnaire item “Like to solve complex problems”

A sample Ω108 of 108 French adults (mean age = 36.69, SD = 15.41, 54 males) took part in a survey which consisted of answering questionnaire items twice. The time lapse between the test and the retest ranged from three to five weeks.

The questionnaire item “J’aime résoudre des problèmes complexes” (Like to solve complex problems) from the International Personality Item Pool (IPIP, Goldberg et al., 2006) was used along with a 5-point Likert scale from “Very Inaccurate” (coded 1) to “Very Accurate” (coded 5). Thus, the descriptive variable XΩ108 -> M(X), where M(X) = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5}2 = {(1, 1), (1, 2), …, (5, 5)}.

Values of the subset {(5, 1), (5, 2), (5, 3)} describe no respondents although 12 respondents chosen the value 5 at the test.

An interpretation is that respondents who chosen the value 5 at the test remembered an example of being engaged in complex problem solving with positive feelings and that when one is able to remember such an experience (test event M∧5), one is able to retrieve a similar memory at the retest, which precludes the judgements “Very Inaccurate”, “Inaccurate”, or “Neutral” (retest event M∧(4∨5)).

For that interpretation to be an explanation, it has to have a falsifier. The test-retest event (M∧5)∧¬[M∧(4∨5)] is a falsifier.

Reference

Goldberg, L. R., Johnson, J. A., Eber, H. W., Hogan, R., Ashton, M. C., Cloninger, C. R., & Gough, H. C. (2006). The International Personality Item Pool and the future of public-domain personality measures. Journal of Personality Research, 40, 84-96.