multivariate models in questionnaire development
TRANSCRIPT
PRINCIPLES OF QUESTIONNAIRE DEVELOPMENT: MULTIVARIATE APPROACH
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Ph.D.Psychology Research Unit
INDIAN STATISTICAL INSTITUTE
203, B.T. Road, Kolkata – 700 108E-mail: [email protected]
http://www.isical.ac.in/~ddroyVenue:P.G. Department of Psychology, Dr. Babasaheb
Ambedkar Marathwada University, Aurangabad (MS) 431004, India
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Questionnaire development is an Art. Develop Multivariate Temperament
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Items are flying, feel,catch and paint them with your inner voice.
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Observation
• Observe everywhere, and ask question:– Why does it happen?– How can I control it ?
• Observe carefully, you may find light in the shadow behind light.
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Exploration
Do extensive literature survey; Organize them systematically and explore. like a child.
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Dreaming
• Spend time alone and dream.
• Dream life style of your population for research.
• Relate each property or dimension of your research construct to their life style.
• You may find multi-dimensions.
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Experience your dream
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Respect Classics
• Review Pioneering articles;
• Study their perspectives;
• Do trend analysis of construct development;
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Perspective
Study same object of research from multiple perspective.
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Painting & Writing your feelings
Your writing will help you to develop items/statements of questionnaire
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Questionnaire Development is a process of structuring and restructuring items
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Statistical Modeling (Hypothetical item linkage)
D1 D2
D3 D4
I2I1
I4
I5 I6
I10
I11I7
I8
I9
I3
D: Dimensions; I: Item
•Classify items by content analysis;
•Write Dimension and hypothesize item linkages across different quadrants.
•Each dimension represents specific trait of research construct.
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Statistical Modeling(Hypothetical Regression)
D1= i1w1+ i2w2+ i3w3+ i4w4+ i5w5+ i6w6+ i7w7+ i8w8+ i9w9+ i10w10+i11w11
D2=i1w1+ i2w2+ i3w3+ i4w4+ i5w5+ i6w6+ i7w7+ i8w8+ i9w9+ i10w10 +i11w11
D3=i1w1+ i2w2+ i3w3+ i4w4+ i5w5+ i6w6+ i7w7+ i8w8+ i9w9+ i10w10+ +i11w11
D4=i1w1+ i2w2+ i3w3+ i4w4+ i5w5+ i6w6+ i7w7+ i8w8+ i9w9+ i10w10 +i11w11
D:Dimension; I:Item; w=Beta weight
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Find out variables for Host’s response to items
Agent
Host
Environment
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Dynamics of variables
Initial
E
X
P
R
E
S
S
I
O
n
Middle Terminal
A EH
H
H
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Make sampling in such a fashion so that role of intervening variables on item response can be controlled
Can we assess their perception, beliefs and attitudes ?
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Observe and interview sample to find out underlying reasons behind item-response variation
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS OF QUESTIONNAIRE
RESPONSE
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Myths about Multivariate Statistical Models
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
MYTHS• Statistical treatment of more than 2 variables is
multivariate statistics;– No, when more than 2 variables are interrelated with
each other, we can use multivariate statistics.In questionnaire, multiple questions measuring same issue are used. So MVS assumptions are more effective in questionnaire development.
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Myth 2• Purpose of multivariate statistics
is to establish correlation among sets of variables.– True. But it’s purpose is not
limited in determining relation among sets of variables. It tends to partial out the effect of some intervening variables on relationship among sets of variables. Response to items varies with other than the construct measured by questionnaire, therefore, control of intervening variable on item response is necessary.
IVINTR_V
DV
It measures intervening vars and gives insight to rectify
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Myth 3
• Loss of original score – Accepted, if analysis
extracts more latent properties within the variable.
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
What is Multivariate Statistics ?• MVS refers to the set of statistical tools that
simultaneously analyze multiple measurements on each individual or object under investigation.
• It is the linear combination of variables with empirically determined weights.
– Variate value= w1X1+ w2X2+ w3X3 – wnXn
• W=weight determined by the multivariate technique; X=observed variable
• MVS is the extension of univariate (central tendency, SD, variance) and bivariate analysis (cross tabulation, correlation, ANOVA, simple regression).
• In MVS, all the variables must be random and interrelated in such ways that their different effects can not meaningfully be interpreted separately.
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Assumptions for Multi-variate Regression Models
• linearity of relationships, • homoscedasticity (same level of relationship for
the full range of the data), • interval or near-interval data, • untruncated variables, proper specification of the
model,• lack of high multicollinearity, and • multivariate normality for purposes of hypothesis
testing.
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Multivariate model for item analysis
• Multivariate model helps researcher to develop insight about possible impact of rejecting individual item on the set of items in which specific item belongs to. This is specially true when researcher assumes interdependence among sets of items.
• When questionnaire assesses multi-traits, multivariate analysis helps to understand the latent structure or inherent relations among the different traits. So, it represents psychological map of the respondents.
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Reliability AnalysisReliability refers to the consistency of
scores.Types : Time and Internal consistency;
Time Consistency
Test- Retest reliability
Test-Retest multi-item response consistencyTest-Retest multi-trait consistency
Internal consistency
Split-half reliability
Split-half Canonical correlation
Others
Rational Equivalence (non-metric)
Item-Item Correspondence
Cronbach's alpha (metric data)
Correpondence map of traits
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Test-Retest Multi-item response
• All items do not behave in same fashion always.
• Identify inconsistent items in the set across periods..
Last supper: Leonardo Da Vinci
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Test-Retest Multi-item response Consistency (8 months interval)
Tree Diagram for 6 Variables
Complete Linkage (after 8 months)
Euclidean distances of Items
Reading for application
Linkage Distance
APX
APAB
APP
APN
APM
APH
2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0
Tree Diagram for 6 Variables
Complete Linkage
Euclidean distances
Linkage Distance
APAB
APP
APN
APM
APX
APH
2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Test-Retest Multi-Trait Consistency (8 months interval)
Tree Diagram for 7 Variables
Complete Linkage
Euclidean distances
Linkage Distance
HATOT
RCTOT
AETOT
AFFTOT
ACHTOT
KNTOT
APPTOT
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Euclidean distances (test retest reliability.sta)
APPTOT KNTOT AFFTOT RCTOT AETOT HATOT ACHTOTAPPTOT 0.00 13.34 27.96 22.07 25.34 36.22 16.25KNTOT 13.34 0.00 24.45 19.21 21.86 34.50 12.33AFFTOT 27.96 24.45 0.00 13.23 12.88 15.75 18.00RCTOT 22.07 19.21 13.23 0.00 13.15 20.66 13.89AETOT 25.34 21.86 12.88 13.15 0.00 18.00 15.17HATOT 36.22 34.50 15.75 20.66 18.00 0.00 26.91ACHTOT 16.25 12.33 18.00 13.89 15.17 26.91 0.00
Tree Diagram for 7 Variables
Complete Linkage
Euclidean distances
Linkage Distance
HATOT
AETOT
RCTOT
AFFTOT
ACHTOT
KNTOT
APPTOT
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Euclidean distances (test retest reliability.sta)
APPTOT KNTOT AFFTOT RCTOT AETOT HATOT ACHTOTAPPTOT 0.00 11.66 29.15 26.17 22.98 37.27 15.26KNTOT 11.66 0.00 26.65 23.81 19.34 34.91 14.18AFFTOT 29.15 26.65 0.00 14.11 16.06 16.03 23.73RCTOT 26.17 23.81 14.11 0.00 14.25 18.11 21.73AETOT 22.98 19.34 16.06 14.25 0.00 20.47 18.89HATOT 37.27 34.91 16.03 18.11 20.47 0.00 31.72ACHTOT 15.26 14.18 23.73 21.73 18.89 31.72 0.00
After 8 mothsTool: Reading motivation questionnaire (Dutta Roy, 2002); N=72 students of same school
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Split-half
• Upper and lower part of the questionnaire sometimes differ in item content.
• All items do not reflect same content always.
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Split-half Canonical correlation
Split-half Canonical correlation provides knowledge about the percent of variance in the one set explained by the other set of variables along a given dimension .
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Study: Split-half Canonical correlation
• 12-item Likert type 5 point scale assessing attitude towards workers education was administered to 1600 rural workers of WB.
Min-Max25%-75%Median value
Box & Whisker Plot
-1
1
3
5
7
9
11
REV_1 REV_2 REV_3 REV_4 REV_5 REV_6
Min-Max25%-75%Median value
Box & Whisker Plot
0
2
4
6
8
10
REV_7 REV_8 REV_9 REV_10 REV_11 REV_12
Split-half rtt=0.85; Cronbach’s alpha = 0.87•Canonical correlation coefficient between the sets (first 6 and last 6 items) = 0.78, Chisq(36)=1558.3, p<0.0000.
REV_7 REV_8 REV_9 REV_10 REV_11 REV_12REV_1 0.46 0.39 0.39 0.33 0.31 0.22REV_2 0.37 0.34 0.38 0.36 0.39 0.28REV_3 0.35 0.32 0.33 0.42 0.45 0.39REV_4 0.34 0.31 0.32 0.29 0.32 0.24REV_5 0.48 0.43 0.41 0.39 0.36 0.30REV_6 0.57 0.48 0.48 0.37 0.36 0.32
Plot of Canonical Correlations
Number of Canonical Roots
Valu
e
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1 2 3 4 5 6
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Internal Consistency• It measures whether several
items that propose to measure the same general construct produce similar scores. For example, if a respondent expressed agreement with the statements "I like to ride bicycles" and "I've enjoyed riding bicycles in the past", and disagreement with the statement "I hate bicycles", this would be indicative of good internal consistency of the test.
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Item-Item correspondence: Internal consistency among 42 items of Reading Motivation questionnaire
2D Plot of Column Coordinates; Dimension: 1 x 2
Input Table (Rows x Columns): 72 cases x 42 items
Standardization: Row and column profiles
Reading Motivation questionnaire
Dimension 1; Eigenvalue: .16550 (16.55% of Inertia)
Dim
ensi
on 2
; Eig
enva
lue:
.098
53 (9
.853
% o
f Ine
rtia)
APHAPM
APNAPP
APXAPAB
KNH
KNIKNK
KNUKNWKNZ
AFI
AFT
AFV
AFY
AFAA
AFAB
RCJ
RCL
RCP
RCSRCY
RCZ
AEK
AEM
AEO
AEQ
AES
AET
HAL
HAN
HAO
HARHAU
HAV
ACHJ
ACHQ ACHR
ACHW
ACHX
ACHAA
-1.5
-1.0
-0.5
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
-3.0 -2.5 -2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0
Correspondence Map shows cluster of intrinsic reading motivation items and extrinsic motivation items are scattered widely.
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Correspondence map of traits
2D Plot of Column Coordinates; Dimension: 1 x 2
Input Table (Rows x Columns): 14 x 6
Standardization: Row and column profiles
Dimension 1; Eigenvalue: .24804 (70.26% of Inertia) Dim
ensi
on 2
; Eig
enva
lue:
.075
17 (2
1.29
% o
f Ine
rtia)
C1
C2
C3C4
C5
C6
-0.5
-0.4
-0.3
-0.2
-0.1
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2Row.CoordsCol.Coords
2D Plot of Row and Column Coordinates; Dimension: 1 x 2Input Table (Rows x Columns): 14 items x 6 response categories
Standardization: Row and column profiles
Dimension 1; Eigenvalue: .24804 (70.26% of Inertia)
Dim
ensi
on 2
; Eig
enva
lue:
.075
17 (2
1.29
% o
f Ine
rtia)
Row1
Row2
Row3
Row4
Row5
Row6
Row7
Row8
Row9
Row10
Row11
Row12
Row13
Row14C1
C2
C3C4
C5
C6
-0.6
-0.5
-0.4
-0.3
-0.2
-0.1
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
-1.0 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4
2D Plot of Row Coordinates; Dimensions: 1 x 2Input Table (Rows x Columns): 14 x 6
Standardization: Row and column profiles
Dimension 1; Eigenvalue: .24804 (70.26% of Inertia)
Dim
ensi
on 2
; Eig
enva
lue:
.075
17 (2
1.29
% o
f Ine
rtia)
Row1
Row2
Row3
Row4
Row5
Row6
Row7
Row8
Row9
Row10
Row11
Row12
Row13
Row14
-0.6
-0.5
-0.4
-0.3
-0.2
-0.1
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
-1.0 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Validity
• Can questionnaire predict change in criterion ?
• Can questionnaire make difference ?
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Types of Validity
Expert JudgmentContent
Item-Total correlation
Construct
Factorial
Criterion
Concurrent
Predictive Convergent Discriminative
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Validity Validity denotes the extent to which an instrument is measuring what it is supposed to
measure It indicates extent of relationship between a scale and the measure of independent criterion variable. It is assumed that criterion variable is reliable and valid.
Bi-variate techniques:Content Validity (It is concerned with the relevance of contents of items, individually and as a whole):
Correlating experts’ judgement; Item-item or item-total correlation
Criterion - related Validity (Correlating questionnaire scores with criterion variable): Correlating the test with criteria during data collection (Concurrent validity);before or after (keeping time gap) (Predictive validity).
Construct Validity : It is concerned with the extent to which questionnaire measures a theoretical construct or trait. Construct is a sort of concept, which is formally proposed with definition and is related to empirical data.
Techniques:Factor analysis (Factorial validity);Correlating with other theoretical measure with which the developing instrument should correlate (convergent
validity)Correlating with other theoretical measure with which the developing instrument should not correlate
(Discriminant validity)
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Content validity
Colors of all items are not same Some item behaves differently
Content Validity (It is concerned with the relevance of contents of items, individually and as a whole): . •Correlating experts’ judgement; •Item-item or item-total correlation
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Predictive validity
• Questionnaires measuring same variable provide different results.
• Which questionnaire predicts success ?
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Concurrent validity
• Collect data simultaneously with two instruments measuring similar construct.
• Use canonical correlation if product moment correlation is significant.
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Construct validity
• Questionnaire should measure the underlying theories of research construct.
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Factorial validity
• Items can be classified by respondent’s latent phenomena.
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Factorial validity
• Two questionnaires can be mixed with respondent’s frame of reference.
• Principal component analysis can be used to find common properties.
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Studies on Validity of questionnaire
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Studies
CONTENT Item-Rating correspondence of questionnaire measuring computer programming task taxonomy.
CRITERION RELATED
Step-wise Multiple regression in predicting academic achievement through reading motivation.
Predictive
CONSTRUCT Correspondence analysis to explore latent structure of RMQ Factorial
Discriminative Discriminative validity of Attitude towards School Infrastructure questionnaire (ASIQ)
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Content validity: Item-Rating Correspondence
Response categoriesItems R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6I1 3 1 11 11 46 122I2 13 9 18 39 65 57I3 14 29 36 43 30 49I4 12 9 17 30 43 90I5 13 13 54 36 52 33I6 4 3 6 31 56 101I7 3 9 20 50 58 61I8 59 48 33 29 16 16I9 11 24 33 53 46 34I10 36 10 35 41 43 36I11 19 29 38 55 42 18I12 50 38 28 26 30 39I13 11 37 38 41 42 32I14 88 43 30 19 10 11
Input data for CA
Plot of Eigenvalues
Input Table (Rows x Columns): 14 x 6
Total Inertia=.35305 Chi²=994.55 df=65 p=0.0000
Number of Dimensions
Eig
enva
lue
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
1 2 3 4 5
Eigenvalues and Inertia for all DimensionsInput Table (Rows x Columns): 14 x 6Total Inertia=.35305 Chi²=994.55 df=65 p=0.0000
Singular Eigen- Perc. of Cumulatv ChiValues Values Inertia Percent Squares
1 0.50 0.25 70.26 70.26 698.732 0.27 0.08 21.29 91.55 211.763 0.13 0.02 4.59 96.14 45.684 0.10 0.01 2.93 99.07 29.175 0.06 0.00 0.93 100.00 9.21
Dutta Roy,D. (2002). Correspondence between item and rating on the checklist of relative importance of computer programming tasks., Journal of Psychometry, 16,2,67-76.
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Criterion related validity:Stepwise Multiple regression
1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00 10.00 11.00Dependent Variables 1.Bengali 1.002.Arithmetic 0.79** 1.003.English 0.22** 0.28** 1.004.Total 0.83** 0.88** 0.65** 1.00Independent Variables 5.Application 0.32** 0.34** -0.13 0.22** 1.006.Knowledge 0.22** 0.11 0.03 0.15* 0.13 1.007.Affiliation -0.15* -0.13 0.06 -0.09 -0.27** -0.36** 1.008.Recognition -0.27** -0.23** 0.15* -0.14 -0.42** -0.28** 0.22** 1.009.Achievement 0.19** 0.19** 0.03 0.17* 0.01 -0.05 -0.34** -0.27** 1.0010.Aesthetic -0.04 -0.03 0.03 -0.02 -0.25** -0.07 -0.21** -0.01 -0.29** 1.0011.Harm avoidance
-0.34** -0.32** -0.07 -0.30** -0.29** -0.35** 0.04 0.12 -0.21** -0.11 1.00
Inter correlation matrix of reading motivation variables (n=200)
Step No.
Reading Motivation variables
R R2 R2 F df
1 Harm avoidance 0.34 0.12 0.12 25.96 1,1982 Application 0.41 0.17 0.05 12.94 2,1973 Recognition 0.44 0.19 0.02 5.25 3,1964 Achievement 0.45 0.2 0.01 2.2 4,1955 Knowledge 0.46 0.21 0.01 2.12 5,194
1 Application 0.34 0.11 0.11 25.582 Harm avoidance 0.41 0.17 0.05 133 Achievement 0.43 0.19 0.02 4.74 Aesthetic 0.44 0.19 0 1.05
1 Recognition 0.15 0.02 0.02 4.682 Harm avoidance 0.17 0.03 0.01 1.483 Application 0.2 0.04 0.01 2.24
1 Harm avoidance 0.3 0.09 0.09 20.132 Application 0.33 0.11 0.02 3.973 Achievement 0.35 0.12 0.01 3.03
P
Prediction to First language achievement0.000.000.020.140.15
Prediction to Arithmetic achievement1,198 0.002,197 0.003,196 0.034,195 ns
Prediction to English score achievement1,198 0.032,197 ns3,196 ns
Prediction to Total Score1,198 0.002,197 0.053,196 0.08
Data collected from Bengali medium schools
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Correspondence analysis to explore latent structure of RMQ
Totalf % f % f % f % f % f % f %
Achievement 6 3.68 31 3.22 115 8.85 236 17 265 21.6 201 21.1 48 15 902Application 1 0.61 20 2.08 50 3.85 126 9.07 274 22.3 296 31.1 135 42.2 902Knowledge 3 1.84 22 2.28 68 5.23 156 11.2 239 19.5 304 31.9 110 34.4 902Aesthetic 29 17.8 146 15.2 249 19.2 270 19.4 155 12.6 43 4.52 10 3.13 902Affiliation 29 17.8 219 22.7 320 24.6 202 14.6 109 8.88 23 2.42 0 0 902Harm avoidance 85 52.2 417 43.3 239 18.4 100 7.2 45 3.66 13 1.37 3 0.94 902Recognition 10 6.13 108 11.2 258 19.9 299 21.5 141 11.5 72 7.59 14 4.38 902Total 163 100 963 100 1299 100 1389 100 1228 100 952 100 320 100 6314
Scoring Categories0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Row.Coords
Col.Coords
Correspondence between Reading motivation variables and scoring categories
Input Table (Rows x Columns): 7 x 7
Standardization: Row and column profiles
Dimension 1; Eigenvalue: .39112 (81.20% of Inertia)
Dim
ensi
on 2
; Eig
enva
lue:
.080
61 (1
6.74
% o
f Ine
rtia)
Achievement
Application
Knowledge
Aesthetic
Affiliation
Harmavoidan
Recognition
SCORE_0
SCORE_1
SCORE_2
SCORE_3
SCORE_4
SCORE_5
SCORE_6
-0.7
-0.6
-0.5
-0.4
-0.3
-0.2
-0.1
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
-1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
Chi-square (36) = 3041.4, p<0.00001
Dr. D. Dutta Roy, Indian Statistical Institute
Discriminative validity of Attitude towards School Infrastructure questionnaire (ASIQ)
ASIQ would be able to differentiate between good and poor infrastructure schools. Methods: ASIQ was administered to the students of primary schools with good and poor
infrastructures. Good and poor criteria was determined by the 8 indices available in District Information System of Education (DISE). Based on Median rank, schools were classified into high and low infrastructure categories.
Results: stepwise discriminant function analysis ([Wilks’ Lambda=0.77, Rao’s R (9,153)=5.13, p<0.00] ) extracted five most important attitudes namely, reliability, equal opportunity, comfort, safety, cleanliness in predicting differences between good and poor infrastructure schools. The overall classification accuracy is 82.8% . This suggests high predictive capacity of the Discriminant function obtained.
Difference between schools with Good and Poorinfrastructure
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
Cleanliness
Safety
Com
fortability
Adequacy
Exploring
Reliability
Easiness
Equal
Opportunity
Willingness
to Participate
Attitudinal Dimensions Good InfrastructurePoor InfrastructureCleanliness 5.05 -0.46Safety -1.27 -0.45Comfort 4.93 3.76Reliability 6.2 4.51Equal Opportunity 2.58 2.03Constant -26.27 -15.57
Fisher’s Linear Discriminant Functions for differentiating Schools with Good and Poor Infrastructure
Multivariate model is the Journey to Harmony
THANK YOU