Generalizability Theory

1973-1980

Richard J. Shavelson, Noreen M. Webb

Expert InsightsPublished 1981

This paper reviews the developments in generalizability theory from 1973 to 1980. The first section presents a sketch of generalizability theory. The second section reviews theoretical contributions about (1) problems associated with estimating variance components, including sampling variability and negative estimates; (2) fixed facets; (3) criterion-referenced measurement; (4) symmetry; (5) multivariate generalizability; and (6) sampling in observational measurement. The final section presents an illustrative application of generalizability theory, including univariate and multivariate generalizability analyses of balanced and unbalanced designs, and Bayesian estimation of variance components.

Document Details

Citation

Chicago Manual of Style

Shavelson, Richard J. and Noreen M. Webb, Generalizability Theory: 1973-1980. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 1981. https://www.rand.org/pubs/papers/P6580.html.
BibTeX RIS

This publication is part of the RAND paper series. The paper series was a product of RAND from 1948 to 2003 that captured speeches, memorials, and derivative research, usually prepared on authors' own time and meant to be the scholarly or scientific contribution of individual authors to their professional fields. Papers were less formal than reports and did not require rigorous peer review.

This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.

RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.