The DOI matches its Crossref record; 19 of the 19 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Monte Carlo Evaluation of Tests for Comparing Dependent Correlations
Abstract
The authors conducted a Monte Carlo simulation of 8 statistical tests for comparing dependent zero-order correlations. In particular, they evaluated the Type I error rates and power of a number of test statistics for sample sizes (Ns) of 20, 50, 100, and 300 under 3 different population distributions (normal, uniform, and exponential). For the Type I error rate analyses, the authors evaluated 3 different magnitudes of the predictor-criterion correlations (rho(y,x1) = rho(y,x2) = .1, .4, and .7). For the power analyses, they examined 3 different effect sizes or magnitudes of discrepancy between rho(y,x1) and rho(y,x2) (values of .1, .3, and .6). They conducted all of the simulations at 3 different levels of predictor intercorrelation (rho(x1,x2) = .1, .3, and .6). The results indicated that both Type I error rate and power depend not only on sample size and population distribution, but also on (a) the predictor intercorrelation and (b) the effect size (for power) or the magnitude of the predictor-criterion correlations (for Type I error rate). When the authors considered Type I error rate and power simultaneously, the findings suggested that O. J. Dunn and V. A. Clark's (1969) z and E. J. Williams's (1959) t have the best overall statistical properties. The findings extend and refine previous simulation research and as such, should have greater utility for applied researchers.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
An Analysis of Transformations
Box, G. E. P., & Cox, D. R. (1964) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology · doi:10.1111/j.2517-6161.1964.tb00553.x · Cited by 15,052
Tests for comparing elements of a correlation matrix
Steiger, J. H. (1980) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.87.2.245 · Cited by 4,621 · cited 5×
“However, it is important to note that the version of Williams’s t that May and Hittner simulated, and which was originally published in Hendrickson, Stanley, and Hills (1970), is mathematically different from the Williams’s t that has been reported by others (e.g., Neill & Dunn, 1975; Steiger, 1980).”
MethodResultInfluentialAmerican Educational Research Journal, 1964-1968
Vesta, F. J. D., & Grinder, R. E. (1968) · American Educational Research Journal · doi:10.2307/1162008 · Cited by 2,587
Comparing correlated correlation coefficients
Meng, X.-L., Rosenthal, R., & Rubin, D. B. (1992) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.111.1.172 · Cited by 2,472
On the probable error of a coefficient of correlation deduced from a small sample
Fisher, R. A. (1921) · Adelaide Research & Scholarship (AR&S) (University of Adelaide) · Cited by 2,089
Averaging correlation coefficients: Should Fisher’s z transformation be used?
Silver, N. C., & Dunlap, W. P. (1987) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.72.1.146 · Cited by 606
Self-citationThe Comparison of Regression Variables
Williams, E. J. (1959) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology · doi:10.1111/j.2517-6161.1959.tb00346.x · Cited by 520
Hotelling, H. (1940) · The Annals of Mathematical Statistics · doi:10.1214/aoms/1177731867 · Cited by 437
Correlation Coefficients Measured on the Same Individuals
Dunn, O. J., & Clark, V. (1969) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.1969.10500981 · Cited by 367
Effect of violation of normality on the t test of the correlation coefficient.
Edgell, S. E., & Noon, S. M. (1984) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037//0033-2909.95.3.576 · Cited by 192
Cited by
cocor: A Comprehensive Solution for the Statistical Comparison of Correlations
Diedenhofen, B., & Musch, J. (2015) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0121945 · Cited by 1,919
Bishara, A. J., & Hittner, J. B. (2012) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/a0028087 · Cited by 766
Self-citationRecurrence is required to capture the representational dynamics of the human visual system
Kietzmann, T. C., Spoerer, C. J., Sörensen, L. K. A., Cichy, R. M., Hauk, O., & Kriegeskorte, N. (2019) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1905544116 · Cited by 406
Service value revisited: Specifying a higher-order, formative measure
Ruiz, D. M., Gremler, D. D., Washburn, J. H., & Carrión, G. C. (2008) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2008.01.015 · Cited by 361
Expectation in Melody: The Influence of Context and Learning
Pearce, M. T., & Wiggins, G. A. (2006) · Music Perception · doi:10.1525/mp.2006.23.5.377 · Cited by 297
Metadata
- Authors
- Hittner, J. B., May, K., & Silver, N. C.
- Venue
- The Journal of General Psychology
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2003-04
- Volume
- 130
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 149-168
- ISSN
- 0022-1309 (ISSN-L)
- 1940-0888
- OpenAlex
- W2038264143
- Cited by
- 425
- References
- 19
- FWCI
- 9.65
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Monte Carlo Evaluation of Tests for Comparing Dependent Correlations. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/00221300309601282
- The paper
- Hittner, J. B., May, K., & Silver, N. C. (2003). A Monte Carlo Evaluation of Tests for Comparing Dependent Correlations. The Journal of General Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221300309601282
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
