当许多受试者有全零反应时,评估二分类项目的维度:来自精神病学的一个例子和使用混合模型的解决方案。

IF 1 4区 心理学 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, MATHEMATICAL Applied Psychological Measurement Pub Date : 2022-05-01 DOI:10.1177/01466216211066602
William F Christensen, Melanie M Wall, Irini Moustaki
{"title":"当许多受试者有全零反应时,评估二分类项目的维度:来自精神病学的一个例子和使用混合模型的解决方案。","authors":"William F Christensen,&nbsp;Melanie M Wall,&nbsp;Irini Moustaki","doi":"10.1177/01466216211066602","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Common methods for determining the number of latent dimensions underlying an item set include eigenvalue analysis and examination of fit statistics for factor analysis models with varying number of factors. Given a set of dichotomous items, the authors demonstrate that these empirical assessments of dimensionality often incorrectly estimate the number of dimensions when there is a preponderance of individuals in the sample with all-zeros as their responses, for example, not endorsing any symptoms on a health battery. Simulated data experiments are conducted to demonstrate when each of several common diagnostics of dimensionality can be expected to under- or over-estimate the true dimensionality of the underlying latent variable. An example is shown from psychiatry assessing the dimensionality of a social anxiety disorder battery where 1, 2, 3, or more factors are identified, depending on the method of dimensionality assessment. An all-zero inflated exploratory factor analysis model (AZ-EFA) is introduced for assessing the dimensionality of the underlying subgroup corresponding to those possessing the measurable trait. The AZ-EFA approach is demonstrated using simulation experiments and an example measuring social anxiety disorder from a large nationally representative survey. Implications of the findings are discussed, in particular, regarding the potential for different findings in community versus patient populations.</p>","PeriodicalId":48300,"journal":{"name":"Applied Psychological Measurement","volume":"46 3","pages":"167-184"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9073639/pdf/10.1177_01466216211066602.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing Dimensionality in Dichotomous Items When Many Subjects Have All-Zero Responses: An Example From Psychiatry and a Solution Using Mixture Models.\",\"authors\":\"William F Christensen,&nbsp;Melanie M Wall,&nbsp;Irini Moustaki\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/01466216211066602\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Common methods for determining the number of latent dimensions underlying an item set include eigenvalue analysis and examination of fit statistics for factor analysis models with varying number of factors. Given a set of dichotomous items, the authors demonstrate that these empirical assessments of dimensionality often incorrectly estimate the number of dimensions when there is a preponderance of individuals in the sample with all-zeros as their responses, for example, not endorsing any symptoms on a health battery. Simulated data experiments are conducted to demonstrate when each of several common diagnostics of dimensionality can be expected to under- or over-estimate the true dimensionality of the underlying latent variable. An example is shown from psychiatry assessing the dimensionality of a social anxiety disorder battery where 1, 2, 3, or more factors are identified, depending on the method of dimensionality assessment. An all-zero inflated exploratory factor analysis model (AZ-EFA) is introduced for assessing the dimensionality of the underlying subgroup corresponding to those possessing the measurable trait. The AZ-EFA approach is demonstrated using simulation experiments and an example measuring social anxiety disorder from a large nationally representative survey. Implications of the findings are discussed, in particular, regarding the potential for different findings in community versus patient populations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48300,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Applied Psychological Measurement\",\"volume\":\"46 3\",\"pages\":\"167-184\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9073639/pdf/10.1177_01466216211066602.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Applied Psychological Measurement\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/01466216211066602\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MATHEMATICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Psychological Measurement","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01466216211066602","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MATHEMATICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

确定项目集潜在维度数的常用方法包括特征值分析和具有不同数量因素的因素分析模型的拟合统计检查。给定一组二分类项目,作者证明,当样本中大多数人的反应都是零时,这些对维度的经验评估往往会错误地估计维度的数量,例如,不赞同健康电池上的任何症状。模拟数据实验进行,以证明当几个常见的诊断维度的每一个可以预期低估或高估潜在变量的真实维度。一个来自精神病学评估社交焦虑障碍的维度的例子,根据维度评估的方法,可以确定1、2、3或更多的因素。引入了一种全零膨胀探索性因子分析模型(AZ-EFA),用于评估具有可测量特征的潜在子群所对应的维度。AZ-EFA方法通过模拟实验和一个来自全国代表性调查的测量社交焦虑障碍的例子来证明。讨论了研究结果的含义,特别是关于社区与患者群体中不同研究结果的可能性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Assessing Dimensionality in Dichotomous Items When Many Subjects Have All-Zero Responses: An Example From Psychiatry and a Solution Using Mixture Models.

Common methods for determining the number of latent dimensions underlying an item set include eigenvalue analysis and examination of fit statistics for factor analysis models with varying number of factors. Given a set of dichotomous items, the authors demonstrate that these empirical assessments of dimensionality often incorrectly estimate the number of dimensions when there is a preponderance of individuals in the sample with all-zeros as their responses, for example, not endorsing any symptoms on a health battery. Simulated data experiments are conducted to demonstrate when each of several common diagnostics of dimensionality can be expected to under- or over-estimate the true dimensionality of the underlying latent variable. An example is shown from psychiatry assessing the dimensionality of a social anxiety disorder battery where 1, 2, 3, or more factors are identified, depending on the method of dimensionality assessment. An all-zero inflated exploratory factor analysis model (AZ-EFA) is introduced for assessing the dimensionality of the underlying subgroup corresponding to those possessing the measurable trait. The AZ-EFA approach is demonstrated using simulation experiments and an example measuring social anxiety disorder from a large nationally representative survey. Implications of the findings are discussed, in particular, regarding the potential for different findings in community versus patient populations.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
8.30%
发文量
50
期刊介绍: Applied Psychological Measurement publishes empirical research on the application of techniques of psychological measurement to substantive problems in all areas of psychology and related disciplines.
期刊最新文献
Effect of Differential Item Functioning on Computer Adaptive Testing Under Different Conditions. Evaluating the Construct Validity of Instructional Manipulation Checks as Measures of Careless Responding to Surveys. A Mark-Recapture Approach to Estimating Item Pool Compromise. Estimating Test-Retest Reliability in the Presence of Self-Selection Bias and Learning/Practice Effects. The Improved EMS Algorithm for Latent Variable Selection in M3PL Model.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1