Contradictions can never a paradox resolve

Thumbnail Image

View/Download File

Persistent link to this item

View Statistics

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title


Contradictions can never a paradox resolve

Published Date






The fact that difference scores tend to be less reliable than the original measurements from which they are calculated should not be a matter of concern in testing the significance of treatment-induced change. The reliabilities of the original measurements are important because unreliability attenuates correlation, and substantial correlation between prescores and postscores is required for difference scores to be of value in controlling for individual differences. Reliability notwithstanding, difference scores provide superior control over true baseline differences in quasi-experimental research, whereas the analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) is generally preferable for baseline control in randomized experimental designs. Index terms: analysis of covariance, baseline correction, difference scores, measurement of change, reliability.



Related to



Series/Report Number

Funding information

Isbn identifier

Doi identifier

Previously Published Citation

Overall, John E. (1989). Contradictions can never a paradox resolve. Applied Psychological Measurement, 13, 426-428. doi:10.1177/014662168901300408

Suggested citation

Overall, John E.. (1989). Contradictions can never a paradox resolve. Retrieved from the University Digital Conservancy,

Content distributed via the University Digital Conservancy may be subject to additional license and use restrictions applied by the depositor. By using these files, users agree to the Terms of Use. Materials in the UDC may contain content that is disturbing and/or harmful. For more information, please see our statement on harmful content in digital repositories.