One important problem in the measurement of non-cognitive characteristics such as personality traits and attitudes is that it has traditionally been made through Likert scales, which are susceptible to response biases such as social desirability (SDR) and acquiescent (ACQ) responding. Given the variability of these response styles in the population, ignoring their possible effects on the scores may compromise the fairness and the validity of the assessments. Also, response-style-induced errors of measurement can affect the reliability estimates and overestimate convergent validity by correlating higher with other Likert-scale-based measures. Conversely, it can attenuate the predictive power over non-Likert-based indicators, given that the scores contain more errors. This study compares the validity of the Big Five personality scores obtained: (1) ignoring the SDR and ACQ in graded-scale items (GSQ), (2) accounting for SDR and ACQ with a compensatory IRT model, and (3) using forced-choice blocks with a multi-unidimensional pairwise preference model (MUPP) variant for dominance items. The overall results suggest that ignoring SDR and ACQ offered the worst validity evidence, with a higher correlation between personality and SDR scores. The two remaining strategies have their own advantages and disadvantages. The results from the empirical reliability and the convergent validity analysis indicate that when modeling social desirability with graded-scale items, the SDR factor apparently captures part of the variance of the Agreeableness factor. On the other hand, the correlation between the corrected GSQ-based Openness to Experience scores, and the University Access Examination grades was higher than the one with the uncorrected GSQ-based scores, and considerably higher than that using the estimates from the forced-choice data. Conversely, the criterion-related validity of the Forced Choice Questionnaire (FCQ) scores was similar to the results found in meta-analytic studies, correlating higher with Conscientiousness. Nonetheless, the FCQ-scores had considerably lower reliabilities and would demand administering more blocks. Finally, the results are discussed, and some notes are provided for the treatment of SDR and ACQ in future studies.
This article explores how traditional scores obtained from different forced-choice (FC) formats relate to their true scores and item response theory (IRT) estimates. Three FC formats are considered from a block of items, and respondents are asked to (a) pick the item that describes them most (PICK), (b) choose the two items that describe them the most and the least (MOLE), or (c) rank all the items in the order of their descriptiveness of the respondents (RANK). The multi-unidimensional pairwise-preference (MUPP) model, which is extended to more than two items per block and different FC formats, is applied to obtain the responses to each item block. Traditional and IRT (i.e., expected a posteriori) scores are computed from each data set and compared. The aim is to clarify the conditions under which simpler traditional scoring procedures for FC formats may be used in place of the more appropriate IRT estimates for the purpose of inter-individual comparisons. Six independent variables are considered: response format, number of items per block, correlation between the dimensions, item discrimination level, and sign-heterogeneity and variability of item difficulty parameters. Results show that the RANK response format outperforms the other formats for both the IRT estimates and traditional scores, although it is only slightly better than the MOLE format. The highest correlations between true and traditional scores are found when the test has a large number of blocks, dimensions assessed are independent, items have high discrimination and highly dispersed location parameters, and the test contains blocks formed by positive and negative items.
Forced-choice questionnaires have been proposed as a way to control some response biases associated with traditional questionnaire formats (e.g., Likert-type scales). Whereas classical scoring methods have issues of ipsativity, item response theory (IRT) methods have been claimed to accurately account for the latent trait structure of these instruments. In this article, the authors propose the multi-unidimensional pairwise preference two-parameter logistic (MUPP-2PL) model, a variant within Stark, Chernyshenko, and Drasgow's MUPP framework for items that are assumed to fit a dominance model. They also introduce a Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) procedure for estimating the model's parameters. The authors present the results of a simulation study, which shows appropriate goodness of recovery in all studied conditions. A comparison of the newly proposed model with a Brown and Maydeu's Thurstonian IRT model led us to the conclusion that both models are theoretically very similar and that the Bayesian estimation procedure of the MUPP-2PL may provide a slightly better recovery of the latent space correlations and a more reliable assessment of the latent trait estimation errors. An application of the model to a real data set shows convergence between the two estimation procedures. However, there is also evidence that the MCMC may be advantageous regarding the item parameters and the latent trait correlations.
Aims: to assess whether there is a change in the prevalence of depression and suicidal ideation after the strict lockdown measures due to the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Spain; and to assess which are the factors associated with the incidence of a depressive episode or suicidal ideation during the lockdown. Methods: data from a longitudinal adult population-based cohort from the provinces of Madrid and Barcelona was analysed (n=1103). Structured face-to-face home-based interviews (pre-pandemic) and telephone interviews were performed. Both depression and suicidal ideation were assessed through an adaptation of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI 3.0). A variety of validated instruments and sociodemographic variables including age, sex, educational level, occupational status, home quietness, screen time, resilience, loneliness, social support, physical activity, disability, economic situation, and COVID-19 related information were also considered. Population prevalence estimates and multivariable logistic regressions were computed. Results: overall, prevalence rates of depression and suicidal ideation did not change significantly from before to after the COVID-19 outbreak. However, the rates of depression among individuals aged 50+ years showed a significant decrease compared to before the pandemic (from 8.48% to 6.41%; p=0.01). Younger individuals (OR=0.97; 95% CI=0.95-0.99) and those feeling loneliness (OR=1.96; 95% CI=1.42-2.70) during the lockdown were at increased risk of developing depression during the confinement.Resilience showed a protective effect against the risk of depression (OR=0.46; 95% CI=0.32-0.66) and suicidal ideation (OR=0.33; 95% CI=0.16-0.68), while individuals perceiving social support were at lower risk of developing suicidal thoughts (OR=0.35; 95% CI=0.18-0.69). Conclusions: continuous reinforcement of mental health preventive and intervening measures during and in the aftermath of the crisis is of global importance, particularly among vulnerable groups who are experiencing the most distress. Future research should strive to evaluate the long-terms effects of the COVID-19 crisis on mental health.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.