Pub Date : 2023-12-23DOI: 10.1177/00131644231218401
Karl Schweizer, A. Gold, Dorothea Krampen, Stefan Troche
Conceptualizing two-variable disturbances preventing good model fit in confirmatory factor analysis as item-level method effects instead of correlated residuals avoids violating the principle that residual variation is unique for each item. The possibility of representing such a disturbance by a method factor of a bifactor measurement model was investigated with respect to model identification. It turned out that a suitable way of realizing the method factor is its integration into a fixed-links, parallel-measurement or tau-equivalent measurement submodel that is part of the bifactor model. A simulation study comparing these submodels revealed similar degrees of efficiency in controlling the influence of two-variable disturbances on model fit. Perfect correspondence characterized the fit results of the model assuming correlated residuals and the fixed-links model, and virtually also the tau-equivalent model.
在确认性因素分析中，将阻碍模型良好拟合的双变量干扰概念化为项目级方法效应，而不是相关残差，可以避免违反残差变异对每个项目都是唯一的这一原则。在模型识别方面，研究了用双因素测量模型的方法因素来表示这种干扰的可能性。结果表明，实现方法因子的合适方法是将其整合到作为双因素模型一部分的固定连接、平行测量或头等效测量子模型中。一项比较这些子模型的模拟研究显示，在控制双变量干扰对模型拟合的影响方面，这些子模型具有相似的效率。假定残差相关的模型与固定链接模型的拟合结果完全一致，实际上也与 tau 等效模型完全一致。
{"title":"Conceptualizing Correlated Residuals as Item-Level Method Effects in Confirmatory Factor Analysis","authors":"Karl Schweizer, A. Gold, Dorothea Krampen, Stefan Troche","doi":"10.1177/00131644231218401","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00131644231218401","url":null,"abstract":"Conceptualizing two-variable disturbances preventing good model fit in confirmatory factor analysis as item-level method effects instead of correlated residuals avoids violating the principle that residual variation is unique for each item. The possibility of representing such a disturbance by a method factor of a bifactor measurement model was investigated with respect to model identification. It turned out that a suitable way of realizing the method factor is its integration into a fixed-links, parallel-measurement or tau-equivalent measurement submodel that is part of the bifactor model. A simulation study comparing these submodels revealed similar degrees of efficiency in controlling the influence of two-variable disturbances on model fit. Perfect correspondence characterized the fit results of the model assuming correlated residuals and the fixed-links model, and virtually also the tau-equivalent model.","PeriodicalId":11502,"journal":{"name":"Educational and Psychological Measurement","volume":"21 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139162221","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-12-22DOI: 10.1177/00131644231213319
Viola Merhof, Caroline M. Böhm, Thorsten Meiser
Item response tree (IRTree) models are a flexible framework to control self-reported trait measurements for response styles. To this end, IRTree models decompose the responses to rating items into sub-decisions, which are assumed to be made on the basis of either the trait being measured or a response style, whereby the effects of such person parameters can be separated from each other. Here we investigate conditions under which the substantive meanings of estimated extreme response style parameters are potentially invalid and do not correspond to the meanings attributed to them, that is, content-unrelated category preferences. Rather, the response style factor may mimic the trait and capture part of the trait-induced variance in item responding, thus impairing the meaningful separation of the person parameters. Such a mimicry effect is manifested in a biased estimation of the covariance of response style and trait, as well as in an overestimation of the response style variance. Both can lead to severely misleading conclusions drawn from IRTree analyses. A series of simulation studies reveals that mimicry effects depend on the distribution of observed responses and that the estimation biases are stronger the more asymmetrically the responses are distributed across the rating scale. It is further demonstrated that extending the commonly used IRTree model with unidimensional sub-decisions by multidimensional parameterizations counteracts mimicry effects and facilitates the meaningful separation of parameters. An empirical example of the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) background questionnaire illustrates the threat of mimicry effects in real data. The implications of applying IRTree models for empirical research questions are discussed.
{"title":"Separation of Traits and Extreme Response Style in IRTree Models: The Role of Mimicry Effects for the Meaningful Interpretation of Estimates","authors":"Viola Merhof, Caroline M. Böhm, Thorsten Meiser","doi":"10.1177/00131644231213319","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00131644231213319","url":null,"abstract":"Item response tree (IRTree) models are a flexible framework to control self-reported trait measurements for response styles. To this end, IRTree models decompose the responses to rating items into sub-decisions, which are assumed to be made on the basis of either the trait being measured or a response style, whereby the effects of such person parameters can be separated from each other. Here we investigate conditions under which the substantive meanings of estimated extreme response style parameters are potentially invalid and do not correspond to the meanings attributed to them, that is, content-unrelated category preferences. Rather, the response style factor may mimic the trait and capture part of the trait-induced variance in item responding, thus impairing the meaningful separation of the person parameters. Such a mimicry effect is manifested in a biased estimation of the covariance of response style and trait, as well as in an overestimation of the response style variance. Both can lead to severely misleading conclusions drawn from IRTree analyses. A series of simulation studies reveals that mimicry effects depend on the distribution of observed responses and that the estimation biases are stronger the more asymmetrically the responses are distributed across the rating scale. It is further demonstrated that extending the commonly used IRTree model with unidimensional sub-decisions by multidimensional parameterizations counteracts mimicry effects and facilitates the meaningful separation of parameters. An empirical example of the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) background questionnaire illustrates the threat of mimicry effects in real data. The implications of applying IRTree models for empirical research questions are discussed.","PeriodicalId":11502,"journal":{"name":"Educational and Psychological Measurement","volume":"179 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139165688","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-12-21DOI: 10.1177/00131644231210509
Mostafa Hosseinzadeh, Ki Lynn Matlock Cole
In real-world situations, multidimensional data may appear on large-scale tests or psychological surveys. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of the quantity and magnitude of cross-loadings and model specification on item parameter recovery in multidimensional Item Response Theory (MIRT) models, especially when the model was misspecified as a simple structure, ignoring the quantity and magnitude of cross-loading. A simulation study that replicated this scenario was designed to manipulate the variables that could potentially influence the precision of item parameter estimation in the MIRT models. Item parameters were estimated using marginal maximum likelihood, utilizing the expectation-maximization algorithms. A compensatory two-parameter logistic-MIRT model with two dimensions and dichotomous item–responses was used to simulate and calibrate the data for each combination of conditions across 500 replications. The results of this study indicated that ignoring the quantity and magnitude of cross-loading and model specification resulted in inaccurate and biased item discrimination parameter estimates. As the quantity and magnitude of cross-loading increased, the root mean square of error and bias estimates of item discrimination worsened.
{"title":"Effects of the Quantity and Magnitude of Cross-Loading and Model Specification on MIRT Item Parameter Recovery","authors":"Mostafa Hosseinzadeh, Ki Lynn Matlock Cole","doi":"10.1177/00131644231210509","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00131644231210509","url":null,"abstract":"In real-world situations, multidimensional data may appear on large-scale tests or psychological surveys. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of the quantity and magnitude of cross-loadings and model specification on item parameter recovery in multidimensional Item Response Theory (MIRT) models, especially when the model was misspecified as a simple structure, ignoring the quantity and magnitude of cross-loading. A simulation study that replicated this scenario was designed to manipulate the variables that could potentially influence the precision of item parameter estimation in the MIRT models. Item parameters were estimated using marginal maximum likelihood, utilizing the expectation-maximization algorithms. A compensatory two-parameter logistic-MIRT model with two dimensions and dichotomous item–responses was used to simulate and calibrate the data for each combination of conditions across 500 replications. The results of this study indicated that ignoring the quantity and magnitude of cross-loading and model specification resulted in inaccurate and biased item discrimination parameter estimates. As the quantity and magnitude of cross-loading increased, the root mean square of error and bias estimates of item discrimination worsened.","PeriodicalId":11502,"journal":{"name":"Educational and Psychological Measurement","volume":"63 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138950656","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-12-01Epub Date: 2022-12-13DOI: 10.1177/00131644221140906
Sijia Huang, Jinwen Jevan Luo, Li Cai
Random item effects item response theory (IRT) models, which treat both person and item effects as random, have received much attention for more than a decade. The random item effects approach has several advantages in many practical settings. The present study introduced an explanatory multidimensional random item effects rating scale model. The proposed model was formulated under a novel parameterization of the nominal response model (NRM), and allows for flexible inclusion of person-related and item-related covariates (e.g., person characteristics and item features) to study their impacts on the person and item latent variables. A new variant of the Metropolis-Hastings Robbins-Monro (MH-RM) algorithm designed for latent variable models with crossed random effects was applied to obtain parameter estimates for the proposed model. A preliminary simulation study was conducted to evaluate the performance of the MH-RM algorithm for estimating the proposed model. Results indicated that the model parameters were well recovered. An empirical data set was analyzed to further illustrate the usage of the proposed model.
{"title":"An Explanatory Multidimensional Random Item Effects Rating Scale Model.","authors":"Sijia Huang, Jinwen Jevan Luo, Li Cai","doi":"10.1177/00131644221140906","DOIUrl":"10.1177/00131644221140906","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Random item effects item response theory (IRT) models, which treat both person and item effects as random, have received much attention for more than a decade. The random item effects approach has several advantages in many practical settings. The present study introduced an explanatory multidimensional random item effects rating scale model. The proposed model was formulated under a novel parameterization of the nominal response model (NRM), and allows for flexible inclusion of person-related and item-related covariates (e.g., person characteristics and item features) to study their impacts on the person and item latent variables. A new variant of the Metropolis-Hastings Robbins-Monro (MH-RM) algorithm designed for latent variable models with crossed random effects was applied to obtain parameter estimates for the proposed model. A preliminary simulation study was conducted to evaluate the performance of the MH-RM algorithm for estimating the proposed model. Results indicated that the model parameters were well recovered. An empirical data set was analyzed to further illustrate the usage of the proposed model.</p>","PeriodicalId":11502,"journal":{"name":"Educational and Psychological Measurement","volume":"1 1","pages":"1229-1248"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10638980/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41340323","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-11-13DOI: 10.1177/00131644231209520
Philippe Goldammer, Peter Lucas Stöckli, Yannik Andrea Escher, Hubert Annen, Klaus Jonas
Indirect indices for faking detection in questionnaires make use of a respondent’s deviant or unlikely response pattern over the course of the questionnaire to identify them as a faker. Compared with established direct faking indices (i.e., lying and social desirability scales), indirect indices have at least two advantages: First, they cannot be detected by the test taker. Second, their usage does not require changes to the questionnaire. In the last decades, several such indirect indices have been proposed. However, at present, the researcher’s choice between different indirect faking detection indices is guided by relatively little information, especially if conceptually different indices are to be used together. Thus, we examined and compared how well indices of a representative selection of 12 conceptionally different indirect indices perform and how well they perform individually and jointly compared with an established direct faking measure or validity scale. We found that, first, the score on the agreement factor of the Likert-type item response process tree model, the proportion of desirable scale endpoint responses, and the covariance index were the best-performing indirect indices. Second, using indirect indices in combination resulted in comparable and in some cases even better detection rates than when using direct faking measures. Third, some effective indirect indices were only minimally correlated with substantive scales and could therefore be used to partial faking variance from response sets without losing substance. We, therefore, encourage researchers to use indirect indices instead of direct faking measures when they aim to detect faking in their data.
{"title":"On the Utility of Indirect Methods for Detecting Faking","authors":"Philippe Goldammer, Peter Lucas Stöckli, Yannik Andrea Escher, Hubert Annen, Klaus Jonas","doi":"10.1177/00131644231209520","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00131644231209520","url":null,"abstract":"Indirect indices for faking detection in questionnaires make use of a respondent’s deviant or unlikely response pattern over the course of the questionnaire to identify them as a faker. Compared with established direct faking indices (i.e., lying and social desirability scales), indirect indices have at least two advantages: First, they cannot be detected by the test taker. Second, their usage does not require changes to the questionnaire. In the last decades, several such indirect indices have been proposed. However, at present, the researcher’s choice between different indirect faking detection indices is guided by relatively little information, especially if conceptually different indices are to be used together. Thus, we examined and compared how well indices of a representative selection of 12 conceptionally different indirect indices perform and how well they perform individually and jointly compared with an established direct faking measure or validity scale. We found that, first, the score on the agreement factor of the Likert-type item response process tree model, the proportion of desirable scale endpoint responses, and the covariance index were the best-performing indirect indices. Second, using indirect indices in combination resulted in comparable and in some cases even better detection rates than when using direct faking measures. Third, some effective indirect indices were only minimally correlated with substantive scales and could therefore be used to partial faking variance from response sets without losing substance. We, therefore, encourage researchers to use indirect indices instead of direct faking measures when they aim to detect faking in their data.","PeriodicalId":11502,"journal":{"name":"Educational and Psychological Measurement","volume":"122 50","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136352015","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-11-09DOI: 10.1177/00131644231206765
Ö. Emre C. Alagöz, Thorsten Meiser
To improve the validity of self-report measures, researchers should control for response style (RS) effects, which can be achieved with IRTree models. A traditional IRTree model considers a response as a combination of distinct decision-making processes, where the substantive trait affects the decision on response direction, while decisions about choosing the middle category or extreme categories are largely determined by midpoint RS (MRS) and extreme RS (ERS). One limitation of traditional IRTree models is the assumption that all respondents utilize the same set of RS in their response strategies, whereas it can be assumed that the nature and the strength of RS effects can differ between individuals. To address this limitation, we propose a mixture multidimensional IRTree (MM-IRTree) model that detects heterogeneity in response strategies. The MM-IRTree model comprises four latent classes of respondents, each associated with a different set of RS traits in addition to the substantive trait. More specifically, the class-specific response strategies involve (1) only ERS in the “ERS only” class, (2) only MRS in the “MRS only” class, (3) both ERS and MRS in the “2RS” class, and (4) neither ERS nor MRS in the “0RS” class. In a simulation study, we showed that the MM-IRTree model performed well in recovering model parameters and class memberships, whereas the traditional IRTree approach showed poor performance if the population includes a mixture of response strategies. In an application to empirical data, the MM-IRTree model revealed distinct classes with noticeable class sizes, suggesting that respondents indeed utilize different response strategies.
{"title":"Investigating Heterogeneity in Response Strategies: A Mixture Multidimensional IRTree Approach","authors":"Ö. Emre C. Alagöz, Thorsten Meiser","doi":"10.1177/00131644231206765","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00131644231206765","url":null,"abstract":"To improve the validity of self-report measures, researchers should control for response style (RS) effects, which can be achieved with IRTree models. A traditional IRTree model considers a response as a combination of distinct decision-making processes, where the substantive trait affects the decision on response direction, while decisions about choosing the middle category or extreme categories are largely determined by midpoint RS (MRS) and extreme RS (ERS). One limitation of traditional IRTree models is the assumption that all respondents utilize the same set of RS in their response strategies, whereas it can be assumed that the nature and the strength of RS effects can differ between individuals. To address this limitation, we propose a mixture multidimensional IRTree (MM-IRTree) model that detects heterogeneity in response strategies. The MM-IRTree model comprises four latent classes of respondents, each associated with a different set of RS traits in addition to the substantive trait. More specifically, the class-specific response strategies involve (1) only ERS in the “ERS only” class, (2) only MRS in the “MRS only” class, (3) both ERS and MRS in the “2RS” class, and (4) neither ERS nor MRS in the “0RS” class. In a simulation study, we showed that the MM-IRTree model performed well in recovering model parameters and class memberships, whereas the traditional IRTree approach showed poor performance if the population includes a mixture of response strategies. In an application to empirical data, the MM-IRTree model revealed distinct classes with noticeable class sizes, suggesting that respondents indeed utilize different response strategies.","PeriodicalId":11502,"journal":{"name":"Educational and Psychological Measurement","volume":" 9","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135242059","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-11-01DOI: 10.1177/00131644231202949
Nataly Beribisky, Gregory R. Hancock
Fit indices are descriptive measures that can help evaluate how well a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) model fits a researcher’s data. In multigroup models, before between-group comparisons are made, fit indices may be used to evaluate measurement invariance by assessing the degree to which multiple groups’ data are consistent with increasingly constrained nested models. One such fit index is an adaptation of the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) called RMSEA D . This index embeds the chi-square and degree-of-freedom differences into a modified RMSEA formula. The present study comprehensively compared RMSEA D to ΔRMSEA, the difference between two RMSEA values associated with a comparison of nested models. The comparison consisted of both derivations as well as a population analysis using one-factor CFA models with features common to those found in practical research. The findings demonstrated that for the same model, RMSEA D will always have increased sensitivity relative to ΔRMSEA with an increasing number of indicator variables. The study also indicated that RMSEA D had increased ability to detect noninvariance relative to ΔRMSEA in one-factor models. For these reasons, when evaluating measurement invariance, RMSEA D is recommended instead of ΔRMSEA.
{"title":"Comparing RMSEA-Based Indices for Assessing Measurement Invariance in Confirmatory Factor Models","authors":"Nataly Beribisky, Gregory R. Hancock","doi":"10.1177/00131644231202949","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00131644231202949","url":null,"abstract":"Fit indices are descriptive measures that can help evaluate how well a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) model fits a researcher’s data. In multigroup models, before between-group comparisons are made, fit indices may be used to evaluate measurement invariance by assessing the degree to which multiple groups’ data are consistent with increasingly constrained nested models. One such fit index is an adaptation of the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) called RMSEA D . This index embeds the chi-square and degree-of-freedom differences into a modified RMSEA formula. The present study comprehensively compared RMSEA D to ΔRMSEA, the difference between two RMSEA values associated with a comparison of nested models. The comparison consisted of both derivations as well as a population analysis using one-factor CFA models with features common to those found in practical research. The findings demonstrated that for the same model, RMSEA D will always have increased sensitivity relative to ΔRMSEA with an increasing number of indicator variables. The study also indicated that RMSEA D had increased ability to detect noninvariance relative to ΔRMSEA in one-factor models. For these reasons, when evaluating measurement invariance, RMSEA D is recommended instead of ΔRMSEA.","PeriodicalId":11502,"journal":{"name":"Educational and Psychological Measurement","volume":"236 3","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135326183","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-30DOI: 10.1177/00131644231203688
Christine E. DeMars, Paulius Satkus
Marginal maximum likelihood, a common estimation method for item response theory models, is not inherently a Bayesian procedure. However, due to estimation difficulties, Bayesian priors are often applied to the likelihood when estimating 3PL models, especially with small samples. Little focus has been placed on choosing the priors for marginal maximum estimation. In this study, using sample sizes of 1,000 or smaller, not using priors often led to extreme, implausible parameter estimates. Applying prior distributions to the c-parameters alleviated the estimation problems with samples of 500 or more; for the samples of 100, priors on both the a-parameters and c-parameters were needed. Estimates were biased when the mode of the prior did not match the true parameter value, but the degree of the bias did not depend on the strength of the prior unless it was extremely informative. The root mean squared error (RMSE) of the a-parameters and b-parameters did not depend greatly on either the mode or the strength of the prior unless it was extremely informative. The RMSE of the c-parameters, like the bias, depended on the mode of the prior for c.
{"title":"Item Parameter Recovery: Sensitivity to Prior Distribution","authors":"Christine E. DeMars, Paulius Satkus","doi":"10.1177/00131644231203688","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00131644231203688","url":null,"abstract":"Marginal maximum likelihood, a common estimation method for item response theory models, is not inherently a Bayesian procedure. However, due to estimation difficulties, Bayesian priors are often applied to the likelihood when estimating 3PL models, especially with small samples. Little focus has been placed on choosing the priors for marginal maximum estimation. In this study, using sample sizes of 1,000 or smaller, not using priors often led to extreme, implausible parameter estimates. Applying prior distributions to the c-parameters alleviated the estimation problems with samples of 500 or more; for the samples of 100, priors on both the a-parameters and c-parameters were needed. Estimates were biased when the mode of the prior did not match the true parameter value, but the degree of the bias did not depend on the strength of the prior unless it was extremely informative. The root mean squared error (RMSE) of the a-parameters and b-parameters did not depend greatly on either the mode or the strength of the prior unless it was extremely informative. The RMSE of the c-parameters, like the bias, depended on the mode of the prior for c.","PeriodicalId":11502,"journal":{"name":"Educational and Psychological Measurement","volume":"65 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136067363","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-30DOI: 10.1177/00131644231205011
Markus T. Jansen, Ralf Schulze
Thurstonian forced-choice modeling is considered to be a powerful new tool to estimate item and person parameters while simultaneously testing the model fit. This assessment approach is associated with the aim of reducing faking and other response tendencies that plague traditional self-report trait assessments. As a result of major recent methodological developments, the estimation of normative trait scores has become possible in addition to the computation of only ipsative scores. This opened up the important possibility of comparisons between individuals with forced-choice assessment procedures. With item response theory (IRT) methods, a multidimensional forced-choice (MFC) format has also been proposed to estimate individual scores. Customarily, items to assess different traits are presented in blocks, often triplets, in applications of the MFC, which is an efficient form of item presentation but also a simplification of the original models. The present study provides a comprehensive review of the present status of Thurstonian forced-choice models and their variants. Critical features of the current models, especially the block models, are identified and discussed. It is concluded that MFC modeling with item blocks is highly problematic and yields biased results. In particular, the often-recommended presentation of blocks with items that are keyed in different directions of a trait proves to be counterproductive considering the goal to reduce response tendencies. The consequences and implications of the highlighted issues are further discussed.
{"title":"Linear Factor Analytic Thurstonian Forced-Choice Models: Current Status and Issues","authors":"Markus T. Jansen, Ralf Schulze","doi":"10.1177/00131644231205011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00131644231205011","url":null,"abstract":"Thurstonian forced-choice modeling is considered to be a powerful new tool to estimate item and person parameters while simultaneously testing the model fit. This assessment approach is associated with the aim of reducing faking and other response tendencies that plague traditional self-report trait assessments. As a result of major recent methodological developments, the estimation of normative trait scores has become possible in addition to the computation of only ipsative scores. This opened up the important possibility of comparisons between individuals with forced-choice assessment procedures. With item response theory (IRT) methods, a multidimensional forced-choice (MFC) format has also been proposed to estimate individual scores. Customarily, items to assess different traits are presented in blocks, often triplets, in applications of the MFC, which is an efficient form of item presentation but also a simplification of the original models. The present study provides a comprehensive review of the present status of Thurstonian forced-choice models and their variants. Critical features of the current models, especially the block models, are identified and discussed. It is concluded that MFC modeling with item blocks is highly problematic and yields biased results. In particular, the often-recommended presentation of blocks with items that are keyed in different directions of a trait proves to be counterproductive considering the goal to reduce response tendencies. The consequences and implications of the highlighted issues are further discussed.","PeriodicalId":11502,"journal":{"name":"Educational and Psychological Measurement","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136069087","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-13DOI: 10.1177/00131644231205310
Keith F. Widaman, William Revelle
The relative advantages and disadvantages of sum scores and estimated factor scores are issues of concern for substantive research in psychology. Recently, while championing estimated factor scores over sum scores, McNeish offered a trenchant rejoinder to an article by Widaman and Revelle, which had critiqued an earlier paper by McNeish and Wolf. In the recent contribution, McNeish misrepresented a number of claims by Widaman and Revelle, rendering moot his criticisms of Widaman and Revelle. Notably, McNeish chose to avoid confronting a key strength of sum scores stressed by Widaman and Revelle—the greater comparability of results across studies if sum scores are used. Instead, McNeish pivoted to present a host of simulation studies to identify relative strengths of estimated factor scores. Here, we review our prior claims and, in the process, deflect purported criticisms by McNeish. We discuss briefly issues related to simulated data and empirical data that provide evidence of strengths of each type of score. In doing so, we identified a second strength of sum scores: superior cross-validation of results across independent samples of empirical data, at least for samples of moderate size. We close with consideration of four general issues concerning sum scores and estimated factor scores that highlight the contrasts between positions offered by McNeish and by us, issues of importance when pursuing applied research in our field.
{"title":"Thinking About Sum Scores Yet Again, Maybe the Last Time, We Don’t Know, Oh No . . .: A Comment on","authors":"Keith F. Widaman, William Revelle","doi":"10.1177/00131644231205310","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00131644231205310","url":null,"abstract":"The relative advantages and disadvantages of sum scores and estimated factor scores are issues of concern for substantive research in psychology. Recently, while championing estimated factor scores over sum scores, McNeish offered a trenchant rejoinder to an article by Widaman and Revelle, which had critiqued an earlier paper by McNeish and Wolf. In the recent contribution, McNeish misrepresented a number of claims by Widaman and Revelle, rendering moot his criticisms of Widaman and Revelle. Notably, McNeish chose to avoid confronting a key strength of sum scores stressed by Widaman and Revelle—the greater comparability of results across studies if sum scores are used. Instead, McNeish pivoted to present a host of simulation studies to identify relative strengths of estimated factor scores. Here, we review our prior claims and, in the process, deflect purported criticisms by McNeish. We discuss briefly issues related to simulated data and empirical data that provide evidence of strengths of each type of score. In doing so, we identified a second strength of sum scores: superior cross-validation of results across independent samples of empirical data, at least for samples of moderate size. We close with consideration of four general issues concerning sum scores and estimated factor scores that highlight the contrasts between positions offered by McNeish and by us, issues of importance when pursuing applied research in our field.","PeriodicalId":11502,"journal":{"name":"Educational and Psychological Measurement","volume":"28 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135859120","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：