Celebrating a common finding: Riding’s CSA test is unreliable |
| |
Authors: | Elizabeth R Peterson Ian J Deary Elizabeth J Austin |
| |
Institution: | aDepartment of Psychology, The University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand;bDepartment of Psychology, University of Edinburgh, 7 George Square, Edinburgh EH8 9JZ, UK |
| |
Abstract: | This paper is a reply to Redmond and colleagues’ brief report that argues we (Peterson et al., 2003a) were not the first to establish the unreliability of the computerised cognitive styles analysis (CSA) test because we used a copy of the test rather than the original. We refute this suggestion and argue that we have already defended our approach to testing the CSA’s reliability (Peterson et al., 2003b) and that our method is entirely appropriate and transparent. Rather than argue over who was the first to test the CSA’s reliability, we believe we should celebrate the fact that we both found the same result, regardless of the method used. |
| |
Keywords: | Cognitive style CSA Reliability |
本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录! |
|