Hostname: page-component-6bb9c88b65-dwch4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-07-20T23:07:47.815Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Minimum Average Correlation between Equivalent Sets of Uncorrelated Factors

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2025

Peter H. Schönemann
Peter H. Schönemann*
Affiliation:
Purdue University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A simplified proof of a lemma by Ledermann [1938], which lies at the core of the factor indeterminacy issue, is presented. It leads to a representation of an orthogonal matrix T, relating equivalent factor solutions, which is different from Ledermann's [1938] and Guttman's [1955]. T is used to evaluate bounds on the average correlation between equivalent sets of uncorrelated factors. It is found that the minimum average correlation is independent of the data.

Keywords

Public PolicyStatistical TheoryAverage CorrelationFactor SolutionEquivalent Factor

Information

Type
Original Paper
Information
Psychometrika , Volume 36 , Issue 1 , March 1971 , pp. 21 - 30
Copyright
Copyright © 1971 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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

*

This paper owes much to an unknown reviewer.

References

Camp, B. H. The converse of Spearman's two-factor theorem. Biometrika, 1932, 24, 418–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cattell, R. B. Factor analysis: An introduction and manual for the psychologist and social scientist, 1952, New York: HarperGoogle Scholar
Eckart, C., & Young, G. The approximation of one matrix by another of lower rank. Psychometrika, 1936, 1, 211–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fruchter, B. Introduction to factor analysis, 1954, Princeton, New Jersey: Van NostrandGoogle Scholar
Guttman, L.. The determinacy of factor score matrices with implications for five other basic problems of common-factor theory. British Journal of Statistical Psychology, 1955, 8, 65–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guttman, L. “Best possible” systematic estimates of communalities. Psychometrika, 1956, 21, 273–285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harman, H. H. Modern factor analysis, 1960, Chicago: University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar
Harman, H. H. Modern factor analysis, Second edition, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1967Google Scholar
Harris, C. W. On factors and factor scores. Psychometrika, 1967, 32, 363–379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heermann, E. F. The geometry of factorial indeterminacy. Psychometrika, 1964, 29, 371–381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heermann, E. F. The algebra of factorial indeterminacy. Psychometrika, 1966, 31, 539–543CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holzinger, K. J., & Harman, H. H. Factor analysis, 1941, Chicago: University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar
Kestelman, H. The fundamental equation of factor analysis. British Journal of Psychology, 1952, 5, 1–6Google Scholar
Lawley, D. N., & Maxwell, A. E. Factor analysis as a statistical method, 1963, London: Butter-worthsGoogle Scholar
Ledermann, W. The orthogonal transformation of a factorial matrix into itself. Psychometrika, 1938, 3, 181–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDonald, R. P., & Burr, E. J. A comparison of four methods of constructing factor scores. Psychometrika, 1967, 32, 381–401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pawlik, K. Dimensionen des Verhaltens, 1968, Bern: H. HuberGoogle Scholar
Piaggio, H. T. H. Three sets of conditions necessary for the existence of a g that is real and unique except in sign. British Journal of Psychology, 1933, 24, 88–105Google Scholar
Schönemann, P. H. Book review: Überla, K. Faktorenanalyse; Pawlik, K. Dimensionen des Verhaltens. Biometrics, 1969, 25, 604–607Google Scholar
Thomson, G. H. The meaning of “i” in the estimate of “g”. British Journal of Psychology, 1934, 25, 92–99Google Scholar
Thomson, G. H. The definition and measurement of “g” (general intelligence). Journal of Educational Psychology, 1935, 26, 241–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomson, G. H. Some points of mathematical technique in the factorial analysis of ability. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1936, 27, 37–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thurstone, L. L. Multiple factor analysis, 1947, Chicago: University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar
Überla, K. Faktorenanalyse, 1968, Berlin: SpringerCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, E. B. On hierarchical correlation systems. Proc. N.A.S., 1928, 14, 283–291CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

This correction applies to the following article(s):

Erratum

Peter H. Schönemann