Opposites performance correlates positively with information and vocabulary, most strongly with range of information¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r1 · q3 · i3 large
Currency · newest study 1911 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i3 For 51 subjects, hard opposites correlated .40 with information and .19 with vocabulary; easy opposites correlated .37 with information and .16 with vocabulary; information and vocabulary correlated .45. → Irving King and Hugo Gold 1911

Evidence¶

Irving King and Hugo Gold 1911¶

Irving King and Hugo Gold. (1911). A Tentative Standardization of Certain "Opposites Tests". University of Iowa. https://eric.ed.gov/?q=A+Tentative+Standardization+of+Certain+Opposites+Tests

q3 · i3 · associational · r1

Supplementary Pearson correlations from Whipple vocabulary and information blanks (100 test words each) given to 51 of the original subjects. The printed effect sizes are Pearson coefficients: hard opposites with Information 40 (i.e., r = .40), the largest printed, and the authors note "the highest with the range of information"; no close check was made on overestimated knowledge.

"Hard opposites with Information 40 Hard opposites with Vocabulary 19 Easy opposites with Information 37 Easy opposites with Vocabulary 16 Information with Vocabulary 45"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Standardized easy opposites lists can be built from words answered correctly by ninety percent or more of subjects — related
• Speed and accuracy correlate slightly on easy opposites lists but not on hard lists — related
• Easy opposites scores correlate with scholastic rank, faculty and graduates outscoring seniors and juniors — related