Measuring accomplishments: pseudoipsativity, quantity versus quality, and dimensionality

This study examined three psychometric questions about measures of accomplishments — notable attainments that have been publicly recognized: are the measures “pseudoipsative”, do quantity and quality scores assess the same thing, and what is the dimensionality of these measures? Comparable samples of graduate students reported their accomplishments on a questionnaire or judged the similarity of the same accomplishments. Accomplishments in the same field were positively correlated in the self-report data, while accomplishments in different fields varied in their correlations, some being positive and others being negative; these results are inconsistent with the predominantly negative correlations that would occur with ipsative measures. Measures of the quantity and quality (importance, rarity) of accomplishments correlated highly in the self-report data, after correction for attenuation, and appeared to assess the same thing. A number of factors emerged in analyses of the self-report data, many of which represented factors previously identified in biographical, interest, and leisure-time activities measures; few factors were found in the judgment data and they differed from the factors in the self-report data and in the other kinds of measures.