A REPLY TO PHILIP LEVY‐IN DEFENSE OF THE <i>G</i> INDEX

Abstract

Levy's criticism that the use of the G index does not equate person means and variances in Q analysis is answered by pointing out that the matrices used in the illustrations supporting his argument are not based upon items which have been ‘double‐scored’, a necessary requirement for the correct use of G in Q technique. His comments, therefore, are regarded as irrelevant.