A theory of two factors: an alternative explanation. Parts 2 & 3

Abstract

Spearman is said to believe in the existence of a general factor, g , which is responsible in part at least for the correlation between tests. The writer attempts to show that g , may be identified with a more inclusive factor, x , the standard in terms of which the measurement or evaluation is made. For Spearman, the value of g may vary between 0 and 1.0. For the writer, x is always equal to 1.0. Spearman's specific factor, according to the author, is derived from errors, and may have any value from 0 to 1.0, provided only that r 2 ag + r 2 as = 1.00. The sum of g and s may, however, be greater than 1.00. For the writer, e is also derived from errors and has also the value of 0. x + e must always equal exactly 1.00. The errors are uncorrelated with each other. Having a constant value of 0, they are uncorrelated with x . The r ae values must consequently be 0 also. Group factors, for Spearman, result from overlapping s 's, or correlated errors. They are named in terms of situations in which they are prone to occur. For the writer, correlated errors appear only when two or more standards are being used. "Spearman apparently believes that the correlations may indicate the relations between abilities. The writer has furnished evidence suggesting that the correlations indicate the relations between the standards." (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved)