生態效度之判斷標準相關係數

過去文獻有提及生態效度的標準為參考Cohen & Cohen (1983)之標準，pearson's r ≥ 0.50為高程度相關、r ≥ 0.30為中等程度相關、r ≥ 0.10為小程度相關。
但思考R-square和誤差的話，25%的解釋力和75%的誤差為良好的生態效度!? 此標準不太合適。

另參考許多文獻解釋生態效度 (Chaytor & Schmitter-Edgecombe, 2003; Chaytor, et al., 2007; Farias, et al., 2003)，統整的標準為 pearson's r > 0.70為高相關、0.30 < r ≤ 0.70為中度相關、r ≤ 0.30為低相關。
我認為此標準適合解釋生態效度，不到10%的解釋力即為此生態效度低，工具不足以反映真實生活的狀況。大於50%的解釋力，即表示有良好之生態效度。介於10%-50%就算可接受之生態效度。


參考文獻
Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1983). Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd ed., Erlbaum: Hillsdale, NJ.
Chaytor, N. & Schmitter-Edgecombe, M. (2003). The ecological validity of neuropsychological tests: A review of the literature on everyday cognitive skills. Neuropsychology Review, 13 (4), 181-197.
Chaytor, N., Temkin, N., Machamer, J., & Dikmen, S. (2007). The ecological validity of neuropsychological assessment and the role of depressive symptoms in moderate to severe traumatic brain injury, Journal of the international neuropsychological society, 13, 377-385.
Farias, S. T., Harrell, E., Neumann, C., & Houtz, A. (2003). The relationship between neuropsychological performance and daily functioning in individuals with Alzheimer's disease: Ecological validity of neurospychological tests. Archives of clinical neuropsychology, 18, 655-672.