The authors examined the dimensionality of the VARK learning styles inventory. The VARK measures four perceptual preferences: visual (V), aural (A), read/write (R), and kinesthetic (K). VARK questions can be viewed as testlets because respondents can select multiple items within a question. The correlations between items within testlets are a type of method effect. Four multitrait—multimethod confirmatory factor analysis models were compared to evaluate the dimensionality of the VARK. The correlated trait—correlated method model had the best fit to the VARK scores. The estimated reliability coefficients were adequate. The study found preliminary support for the validity of the VARK scores. Potential problems related to item wording and the scale’s scoring algorithm were identified, and cautions with respect to using the VARK with research were raised.

No abstract

This article presents the use of an ant colony optimization (ACO) algorithm for the development of short forms of scales. An example 22-item short form is developed for the Diabetes-39 scale, a quality-of-life scale for diabetes patients, using a sample of 265 diabetes patients. A simulation study comparing the performance of the ACO algorithm and traditionally used methods of item selection is also presented. It is shown that the ACO algorithm outperforms the largest factor loadings and maximum test information item selection methods. The results demonstrate the capabilities of using ACO for creating short-form scales.

The LCM and TPM with a log-transformed dependent variable are superior to other approaches in handling data with ceiling effects.

The Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale (MCSDS), the most commonly used social desirability bias (SDB) assessment, conceptualizes SDB as an individual’s need for approval. The Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding (BIDR) measures SDB as two separate constructs: impression management and self-deception. Scores on SDB scales are commonly used to validate other measures although insufficiently validated themselves. This study used college students’ responses to the MCSDS and the BIDR to investigate their factorial validity. Using confirmatory factor analysis, neither a one-nor a two-factor model was found to be strongly supported. It is recommended that researchers be cautious when using scores on these SDB scales until their dimensionality is better understood.