Theoretical Reliability, and Validity--论文代写范文精选

任务的参与者加入可观察到的因素。一个错误的解决方案并不意味着结束的动态。参与者有机会获得他们想要的。在理论研究、因数分析上是满足特定的共通性,和误差。下面的paper代写范文进行论述。

Abstract 
  The α-reliability was 0.993, and consistently, error was 0.007. The communalities, the specific, and the error variances are in Table 2. The sum row before the last row is essential in Table 2. Division by 24 gave the scaled variances, and at the same time, reliability resulted when the sum of the communalities, and the sum of the specific variances were added or 1=0.822+0.177+0.001 for the communalities, the specific, and the error variances. The time reliability followed from 0.882+0.177=0.999. As with the validity the sum of the nondeterminative coefficients was 224.806, and the full nondetermination was 240. The error location derived from 1-(224.806/240). The total amount of the random frequencies was 1378. Therefore, (0.063*1378)/16 gave the wrong located frequencies, about five frequencies per category.

 ACTIVITIES, OBVIOUS SOCIAL STIMULI 10 
  They reason from the entire person to his or her details or from his or her details to the whole person while the “participants” who behave erroneously ignore individual features, and do not reason. Therefore, two approaches are inferable from the causalities the one, which calls an analytic approach, the other which calls a holistic approach such as small children have. Stereotyping, and intuition belong to the holistic approach because they do not analyse parts, and their relations or details whereas the one-person deduction, and induction represent the analytical approach. Other patterns are scarce in the random results. The selection of the activities is scattered. The obvious social stimuli have inverse relationships between the first wrong person, and the finishers. The losers, and the accomplishers have also an inverse relationship between the obvious stimuli. Therefore, the incomplete pattern in the pseudorandom results warrants the hypothesis about the approaches: Persons, who have an analytic approach to obvious social stimuli, infer more correctly activities of other persons than those, who have a holistic approach.

 Procedure 
  The task of the participants was to join the observable persons with their activities based on the obvious social stimuli without verbal behavior. Only autonomous solutions counted. The occasions were videotaped. One wrong solution did not mean anything but two wrong solutions meant the end of the dynamic. The participants had a chance to leave the situation whenever they wanted.

Empirical Reliability, and Validity 
The row correlations were calculated from the matrix in Table 4. The correlations were squared, and α-reliability was assessed from the coefficients of determination. As in the theoretical research, Q-factor analysis was sufficient for the communalities from which the specific, and error variances derived. One subtracted the communalities that gave the unique variances. The error term from the α-reliability multiplied the unique variances, and the values were subtracted from the unique variances. The procedure gave the specific variances. The error variance multiplied the unique variances. The α-reliability was 0.885, and accordingly the error variance was 0.115. 

  The communalities, the specific, and the error variances are in Table 5. The row before the last row includes in the sums of the variances. Division by 24 gave the scaled variances, and at the same time, reliability resulted when the sums of the communalities, and specific variances added. The communality sum was 0.791 (rounded value from the fourth decimal value), the specific variance was 0.185, and the error variance was 0.024. The reliability coefficient was 0.976. Comparison of the random variances 1.000=0.822+0.177+0.001 with the empirical variances 1.000=0.791+0.185+0.024 indicated that the common variance diminishes, the specificity rises, and the error variance increases considerably because of the researcher. The assessment of validity began subtracting the squared correlations from one, which gave the coefficients of nondetermination or k2 . The matrix sum of nondetermination was calculated, and it was 224.667. In the nondeterminative matrix, the diagonal values were nulls, and the sum of the full nondetermination was 240 when the coefficients were ones. 

 ACTIVITIES, OBVIOUS SOCIAL STIMULI 13
  The error location was obtained subtracting the quotient of the sum of the matrix cells, and 240 from one or 1-(224.667/240). The total amount of the empirical frequencies was 628. Therefore, 0.064*628/16 gave the wrong located frequencies about three frequencies per category. Empirical Dynamic The column frequencies were added in Table 4, and a 4 by 4 matrix resulted. The frequencies were converted into probabilities, row wise before the matrix was transposed, and the probabilities calculated, again. The squared Householder method applied to the matrix because the method gave a double stochastic matrix, and mapping into the interval of 0-1, simultaneously. 

  The squared Householder matrix was transposed, and decomposed to four vectors. Cartesian products were calculated between the vectors, and the result was three matrices. The sum of the matrices divided each of the matrices, which produced the Bayes matrices. A new 12 by 12 matrix constructed from the Bays matrices, and the Bayes matrices were diagonally. The squared Householder method was applied to the new matrix. The Householder matrix was reduced to a matrix that included in the row maxima, only. The last application of the squared Householder method gave a matrix of ones, and nulls. The last matrix was powered from P0 to P12 because of 12 observable persons. The first matrix in the dynamic was the usual base, and accordingly, no causalities existed. The matrix powers corresponded with the order of the observable persons. Thereafter, the causalities were grouped according to the outcomes.

 Discussion 
  The random results warranted the hypothesis: Persons, who have an analytic approach to obvious social stimuli, infer more correctly activities of other persons than those, who have a holistic approach. The hypothesis corroborates. As to the random, and empirical dynamic, they follow up with the real dynamic because the pre process, and the post process matrices are identity matrices. Therefore, the dynamic returns to the no causation that prevailed before the dynamic. A scrutiny in Tables 7, and 8 where the random, and the empirical causal dynamic juxtapose shows the corroboration. In the random dynamic, upper part in Table 7, there is no recurrence when the random “participants” infer the person wrong first time. The reverse takes place in the empirical dynamic. 

  The causalities go through in groups of three, recurrently. Therefore, it is sufficient to present one cycle. In the place of the first person, the participants select the rather common activities, and use the body builds as the obvious stimulus but they ignore the individual features, which leads to the wrong person. When the second person is in question, the participants select the rather common activities but they apply to the outfit as the obvious stimulus, and again, annul the individuality that results in the wrong person. In the place of the third person, the participants select the rare activities, employ in the entire person as the obvious stimulus, and cancel the individual traits that induce the wrong person. The cycle repeats itself four times. The cycle of three occurs when the losers construct the causalities, too. The losers select the rare activities, and make use of the entire person as the obvious stimulus, and they do not reason that brings forth the dropout from the dynamic.(paper代写)

  Second, the losers select the rather rare activities, find a use of the body builds as the obvious stimulus but further, they do not reason that causes the drop out the dynamic. In the last case, the losers also select the rather rare activities, use the outfit as the seen stimulus, and do not reason that brings with it the end in the dynamic. As with the inferences the holistic approach is more clear-cut in the empirical dynamic than in the random one because of ignoring the individuality, and no reasoning.(paper代写)

  51Due网站原创范文除特殊说明外一切图文著作权归51Due所有；未经51Due官方授权谢绝任何用途转载或刊发于媒体。如发生侵犯著作权现象，51Due保留一切法律追诉权。
  更多paper代写范文欢迎访问我们主页 www.51due.com 当然有paper代写需求可以和我们24小时在线客服QQ:800020041 联系交流。-X(paper代写)