Oops... I apologize for these errors...

 These are errors that should have been corrected during the production process but were not. If you find new errors, would you please be so kind as to send me a note (njs@ku.edu) letting me know what page and the nature of the correction? Thanks for your understanding and help. Neil

---------------------------------

Corrections for 4^rd Edition of

---------------------------------

Corrections for 3^rd Edition of

p.xxi. Line 10. You can see the errors that have been found (and other stuff as well) at www.statisticsforpeople.com

p6. Thanks to Mike from Alaska who pointed ou that where he lives and teaches, the sun only rises and sets once!

p14. For those of you who have never seen a phone with a cord, this phone icon is what it looks like. Next edition - cell phone icon! Thanks to Mike.

p23. Tech Talk. Line 4. “mean of a mean),…” should be “mean of a sample),…”

p25.  Line 5. “the median is same…” should be “the median is the same…”

p33. Remove one horizontal line below Score 1, Score 2 and Score 3

p38. The "S" should be S.

p87. Under Correlation “r²_xy” should be “r_xy”

p91.  Line 8. “Chapter 13),” should be “Chapter 14).”

p102.  Line 8. “That test consists…” should be “That Test Score consists…”

p108. The value in the equation “5.18” should be “5.17”

p114. Line 22. “current validity.” should be “criterion validity.”

p146. Second line from bottom. “1.70” should be “117”

p176. In formula 10.5, “90” should be “900”

p181. The numerator in the ES formula should include the proper superscripts where they are squared.

p181. Line 6 from bottom. New url is http://www.uccs.edu/lbecker/psy590/escalc3.htm

p182. Line 6. “2.s” should be “2.”

p185. Line 2. “(-.18)“ should be “(-.14)”

p186 Line 2. “1 to 10” should be “1 to 10 where the lower score the more anxiety.“ (Thanks Benny)

p191. Line 3. “10.1…” should be “11.1…”

p222. Table in center of page should be centered.

p226. Table at top should be as follows

 

 

p230. In step 8. “Fixed” should be “Random”

p231. #5, numbers should read F(1,36) =.197, p = .736

p231. #6, numbers should read F(1,36) = .252, p = .704.

p238. 15 lines down, should read as "the critical value is .381 (using df=30) because it's most conservative). So, at the .05 level, with 27 degrees of freedom for a two-tailed test, the value needed for the rejection of the null hypothesis is .381.

p.238. Right before steps 7 and 8, should read "are not related is .381."

p239. Line 2. .349 should be .381

p253. Yc (with a vertical line through the c) should be Y'.

p238. Line 16. “because it’s closest).” should be “because it’s most conservative).”

p253. Line 5. Y? should be Y’

p255. Line 1. “We’ll I get…” should be “We’ll get…”

p256. Line 6 from bottom. “Y’= -125” should be “Y’= -.125”

p258. Line 9. "When selecting a dependent variable" should read "When selecting an independent variable".

p261. Line 4 from bottom. “Which are the best predictor…” should be “Which is the best predictor…”

p266. In table, last column “(O-E)2/E” should be “(O-E)²/E”

p331. Under z-score of .25, area under the curve is 9.99, not .99

p371. 2nd line from the bottom, the equation X = 78 + (5.5 x 1.79) should be X = 78 + (5.5 x 1.29) and the correct answer is 85.095 or 85.10. Thanks to Vincent N. 

p377. “2d. dependent” should be “2d. independent”

p384. 6a. “Here’s the SPSS  output.” should read "The SPSS output for this problem is shown below." and "level of education" should read "years of experience".

P384. 6b should read and appear as follows…

 6b. And here’s the regression equation…

Y’ = .959(X₁) – 5.786(X₂) – 1.839(X₃) + 96.337

which, if we substitute the values for X₁, X₂ and X₃, we get the following…

Y’ = .959(12) – 5.786(2) – 1.839(5) + 96.377

which produces a Chef’s score of…

64.062

 

Model		Unstandardized Coefficients		Standardized Coefficients	t	Sig.
		B	Std. Error	Beta
1	(Constant)	96.377	10.068		9.573	.000
	Years_Exp	.959	.551	.671	1.741	.102
	Level_Ed	-5.786	3.935	-.352	-1.470	.162
	Number_Positions	-1.839	1.412	-.489	-1.303	.212

 
Note that none of the predictors, on their own are significant.

p385. “3. With 2 degrees” should be “With 2 degrees”

p385. “Here’s the worksheet” should be “3. Here’s the worksheet”

Corrections for Online Exercises for

In the Practice Quiz for Chapter 2 (online study guide at http://www.sagepub.com/salkindstudy/02/quiz.htm), the mean for #3 is noted as 19 while the correct answer for a 7-case sample of 13, 18, 22, 12, 13, 16, 20 is 16.28 or 16.29. (Thanks Mona).

Corrections for 1st Edition of Test & Measurements for People Who (Think They) Hate Tests & Measurements

 
Many thanks (and more to come) to

*     Sara Agnew, Breanna Johnson, and Kristopher Koonse, and especially
Graham E. Higgs, Associate Professor of Psychology at Columbia College
of Missouri

*     Valerie Shutem Ed Psych and Learning Systems, Florida State University

p56. Formula at bottom of the page should read as…

Interrater Reliability = Number of Agreements/Number of Possible Agreements (Thanks to Rick W. and Kim O.)

p68. Under the Criterion Validity heading, paragraph 2 reads: If the criterion
is taking place in the future, we talk about predictive concurrent validity or just
predictive validity.  The word, concurrent in this sentence should be criterion

p148.  Under Computing the Difficulty Index, first sentence, should read…
The difficulty index tells us how many people got that the item correct.

p149. Under Computing the Discrimination Index, half way down the page.
If we plug in the number to the above formula, we find that the discrimination
level for Item 14 is 0.64.   Also, the small d should replace the capital D at the
beginning of the formula.

p211. Under Tech Talk, signs should be replaced with sins.

p276. Third paragraph from the bottom, should read... Career development isn’t so finite a process that one test, no matter how good it is, will provide all the
answers. So, should you take more take more than one vocational test? Sure – if
you have the time and money, what could it hurt?

---------------------------------

Corrections for 2^nd Edition of

 The second edition of the Excel book just came out and I welcome your comments and corrections. And, with this set of corrections, you can see who gets credit for the correction. Thanks!

p61. Fourth full paragraph should read as follows, "It's also fair to say that the mean i is a more precise measure than the median, and the mode is a less precise measure than the median." (Thanks to Wendy O.)

p97. In Figure 4.15, Distribution C is platykurtic compared to Distribution B Distribution A is leptokurtic compared to Distribution B. (Thanks to Janice).

p118 (middle of page), when the numbers are plugged into the formula, it is written 
as (10 * 247) - (54 - 43).  It should be be 54 x 43 according to the formula. (Thanks 
to Dr. Richard W.).

p269. Chapter 13. There are some inaccuracies in my distinction between different types of ANOVAs, well pointed out by Dr. Rick Froman. Send me a note if you want to see the complete text of hte valuable points he makes. (Thank to Rick).

Figures 12.1 and 13.1. The word "related" should be "repeated".

I'm wokring on the second edition of the Tests and Measurements book and it should be available in early 2011. More exercises, sample tests and more will be in the new edition.