A Tribute to the Mind, Methodology and Mentoring of Wayne Velicer.

Wayne Velicer is remembered for a mind where mathematical concepts and calculations intrigued him, behavioral science beckoned him, and people fascinated him. Born in Green Bay, Wisconsin on March 4, 1944, he was raised on a farm, although early influences extended far beyond that beginning. His Mathematics BS and Psychology minor at Wisconsin State University in Oshkosh, and his PhD in Quantitative Psychology from Purdue led him to a fruitful and far-reaching career. He was honored several times as a high-impact author, was a renowned scholar in quantitative and health psychology, and had more than 300 scholarly publications and 54,000+ citations of his work, advancing the arenas of quantitative methodology and behavioral health. In his methodological work, Velicer sought out ways to measure, synthesize, categorize, and assess people and constructs across behaviors and time, largely through principal components analysis, time series, and cluster analysis. Further, he and several colleagues developed a method called Testing Theory-based Quantitative Predictions, successfully applied to predicting outcomes and effect sizes in smoking cessation, diet behavior, and sun protection, with the potential for wider applications. With $60,000,000 in external funding, Velicer also helped engage a large cadre of students and other colleagues to study methodological models for a myriad of health behaviors in a widely applied Transtheoretical Model of Change. Unwittingly, he has engendered indelible memories and gratitude to all who crossed his path. Although Wayne Velicer left this world on October 15, 2017 after battling an aggressive cancer, he is still very present among us.

Creativity and technical innovation: spatial ability's unique role.

In the late 1970s, 563 intellectually talented 13-year-olds (identified by the SAT as in the top 0.5% of ability) were assessed on spatial ability. More than 30 years later, the present study evaluated whether spatial ability provided incremental validity (beyond the SAT's mathematical and verbal reasoning subtests) for differentially predicting which of these individuals had patents and three classes of refereed publications. A two-step discriminant-function analysis revealed that the SAT subtests jointly accounted for 10.8% of the variance among these outcomes (p < .01); when spatial ability was added, an additional 7.6% was accounted for--a statistically significant increase (p < .01). The findings indicate that spatial ability has a unique role in the development of creativity, beyond the roles played by the abilities traditionally measured in educational selection, counseling, and industrial-organizational psychology. Spatial ability plays a key and unique role in structuring many important psychological phenomena and should be examined more broadly across the applied and basic psychological sciences.

A 12-Point Circumplex Structure of Core Affect.

Core Affect is a state accessible to consciousness as a single simple feeling (feeling good or bad, energized or enervated) that can vary from moment to moment and that is the heart of, but not the whole of, mood and emotion. In four correlational studies (Ns = 535, 190, 234, 395), a 12-Point Affect Circumplex (12-PAC) model of Core Affect was developed that is finer grained than previously available and that integrates major dimensional models of mood and emotion. Self-report scales in three response formats were cross-validated for Core Affect felt during current and remembered moments. A technique that places any external variable into the 12-PAC showed that 29 of 38 personality scales and 30 of 30 mood scales are significantly related to Core Affect, but not in a way that revealed its basic dimensions.

The insidious effects of failing to include design-driven correlated residuals in latent-variable covariance structure analysis.

In practice, the inclusion of correlated residuals in latent-variable models is often regarded as a statistical sleight of hand, if not an outright form of cheating. Consequently, researchers have tended to allow only as many correlated residuals in their models as are needed to obtain a good fit to the data. The current article demonstrates that this strategy leads to the underinclusion of residual correlations that are completely justified on the basis of measurement theory and research design. In many designs, the absence of such correlations will not substantially harm the fit of the model; however, failure to include them can change the meaning of the extracted latent variables and generate potentially misleading results. Recommendations include (a) returning to the full multitrait-multimethod design when measurement theory implies the existence of shared method variance and (b) abandoning the evil-but-necessary attitude toward correlated residuals when they reflect intended features of the research design.

Empirical and conceptual problems with longitudinal trait-state models: introducing a trait-state-occasion model.

The latent trait-state-error model (TSE) and the latent state-trait model with autoregression (LST-AR) represent creative structural equation methods for examining the longitudinal structure of psychological constructs. Application of these models has been somewhat limited by empirical or conceptual problems. In the present study, Monte Carlo analysis revealed that TSE models tend to generate improper solutions when N is too small, when waves are too few, and when occasion factor stability is either too large or too small. Mathematical analysis of the LST-AR model revealed its limitation to constructs that become more highly auto-correlated over time. The trait-state-occasion model has fewer empirical problems than does the TSE model and is more broadly applicable than is the LST-AR model.

Beyond the F test: Effect size confidence intervals and tests of close fit in the analysis of variance and contrast analysis.

This article presents confidence interval methods for improving on the standard F tests in the balanced, completely between-subjects, fixed-effects analysis of variance. Exact confidence intervals for omnibus effect size measures, such as or and the root-mean-square standardized effect, provide all the information in the traditional hypothesis test and more. They allow one to test simultaneously whether overall effects are (a) zero (the traditional test), (b) trivial (do not exceed some small value), or (c) nontrivial (definitely exceed some minimal level). For situations in which single-degree-of-freedom contrasts are of primary interest, exact confidence interval methods for contrast effect size measures such as the contrast correlation are also provided.

When constraints interact: a caution about reference variables, identification constraints, and scale dependencies in structural equation modeling.

In traditional approaches to structural equations modeling, variances of latent endogenous variables cannot be specified or constrained directly and, consequently, are not identified, unless certain precautions are taken. The usual method for achieving identification has been to fix one factor loading for each endogenous latent variable at unity. An alternative approach is to fix variances using newer constrained estimation algorithms. This article examines the philosophy behind such constraints and shows how their appropriate use is neither as straightforward nor as noncontroversial as portrayed in textbooks and computer manuals. The constraints on latent variable variances can interact with other model constraints to interfere with the testing of certain kinds of hypotheses and can yield incorrect standardized solutions with some popular software.