Abstract

After tackling the problems of gathering a batch of observations according to some systematic plan, the scientist faces the problem Eve brought Adam—the troubling fact of choice. What treatments should be applied to the data, arithmetically or graphically? Why these treatments rather than some others? What principles can aid in making the choices? How can we organize our thinking about the overall process of data analysis?

Keywords

Multiple Regression Analysis Path Analysis Path Coefficient Causal Model Canonical Analysis 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Anderson, T. W. (1958). An introduction to multivariate statistical analysis. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  2. Asher, H. (1976). Causal modeling. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  3. Barnett, V., & Lewis, T. (1978). Outliners in statistical data. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  4. Box, G. E. P. (1954). Some theorems on quadratic forms applied in the study of analysis of variance problems. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 25, 290–302, 484-498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Draper, N. R., & Smith, H. (1981). Applied regression analysis. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  6. Duncan, O. (1975). to structural equation models. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  7. Egan, B., Fitzpatrick, M., Schneider, R., & Julius, S. (1985). Vascular hypertrophy in borderline hypertension: Relationship to blood pressure and sympathetic drive. Clinical and Experimental Hypertension, 7, 243–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Holtzman, W. H. (1963). Statistical models for the study of change in the single case. In C. H. Harris (Ed.), Problems in measuring change. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
  9. Hunter, J., & Gerbing, D. (1982). Unidimensional measurement, second order factor analysis, and causal models. Research in Organizational Behavior, 4, 267–320.Google Scholar
  10. Julius, S., Weder, A., & Hinderliter, A. (1986). Does behaviorally induced blood pressure variability lead to hypertension? In K. Matthews, S. Weiss, T. Detre, T. Dembroski, B. Falkner, S. Manuck, & R. Williams (Eds.), Handbook of stress, reactivity, and cardiovascular disease. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  11. Kendall, M. G. (1973). Time-series. New York: Hafner.Google Scholar
  12. Mosteller, F., & Tukey, J. W. (1977). Data analysis and regression. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  13. Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial Research Group. (1982). Multiple risk factor intervention trial. Journal of the American Medical Association, 248, 1465–1477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Simon, H. (1954). Spurious correlation: A causal interpretation. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 49, 467–479.Google Scholar
  15. Smith, O., Astley, C., Hohimer, A., & Stephenson, R. (1980). Behavioral and cerebral control of cardiovascular function. In M. Hughes & C. Baines (Eds.), Neural control of circulation. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  16. Tukey, J. W. (1962). The future of data analysis. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 33, 1–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Van Egeren, L. F. (1973). Multivariate statistical analysis. Psychophysiology, 10(5), 517–532.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Winer, B. J. (1971). Statistical principles in experimental design. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  19. Wright, S. (1921). Correlation and causation. Journal of Agricultural Research, 20, 557–585.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lawrence F. Van Egeren
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychiatryMichigan State UniversityEast LansingUSA

Personalised recommendations