Improving the Measurement of Psychological Variables: Ideal Point Models Rock!

Drasgow, Fritz; Chernyshenko, Oleksandr S.; Stark, Stephen

doi:10.1111/j.1754-9434.2010.01284.x

Cited by 6 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…personality, attitudes, and vocational interests) are most appropriately characterized by an ideal point response process (Drasgow, Chernyshenko, & Stark, 2010a, 2010bRoberts, Laughlin, & Wedell, 1999;Stark, Chernyshenko, Drasgow, & Williams, 2006;Tay & Drasgow, 2012;Tay, Drasgow, Rounds, & Williams, 2009).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Detecting Differential Item Functioning of Polytomous Items for an Ideal Point Response Process

Wang

Tay²,

Drasgow

2013

Applied Psychological Measurement

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There has been growing use of ideal point models to develop scales measuring important psychological constructs. For meaningful comparisons across groups, it is important to identify items on such scales that exhibit differential item functioning (DIF). In this study, the authors examined several methods for assessing DIF on polytomous items generated by an ideal point process. Two paradigms (i.e., null hypothesis significance testing [NHST] and effect size quantification) were utilized, and three test statistics (i.e., the log-likelihood ratio [LR], the Akaike information criterion [AIC], and Lord's chi-square) and two approaches to DIF testing (i.e., the constrained and free baseline methods) were evaluated. In addition, the authors investigated three levels of impact. The results revealed that DIF effect sizes were moderately large for the .50 uniform DIF conditions and small for nonuniform DIF; moreover, the LR test in general yielded the best results. When there was small to moderate impact, the free baseline approach combined with an item linking implementation produced the most satisfactory results.Keywords item response theory, ideal point model, differential item functioning, the generalized graded unfolding model (GGUM)

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Detecting Differential Item Functioning of Polytomous Items for an Ideal Point Response Process

Wang

Tay²,

Drasgow

2013

Applied Psychological Measurement

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thurstonian IRT models have developed from Lewis Thurstone's work on scaling (Thurstone, 1927) and are based on the idea that respondents compare the utility of different choice alternatives on a latent utility scale. These models have recently been proven useful in scoring forced-choice questionnaires (Brown, 2016; also see Drasgow, Chernyshenko, & Stark, 2010;Stark et al, 2006) and also in recovering latent motive scores from implicit motive measures (Lang, 2014;.…”

Section: Other Response Process Irt Approachesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Science and Practice of Item Response Theory in Organizations

Lang

Tay

2021

Annu. Rev. Organ. Psychol. Organ. Behav.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Item response theory (IRT) is a modeling approach that links responses to test items with underlying latent constructs through formalized statistical models. This article focuses on how IRT can be used to advance science and practice in organizations. We describe established applications of IRT as a scale development tool and new applications of IRT as a research and theory testing tool that enables organizational researchers to improve their understanding of workers and organizations. We focus on IRT models and their application in four key research and practice areas: testing, questionnaire responding, construct validation, and measurement equivalence of scores. In so doing, we highlight how novel developments in IRT such as explanatory IRT, multidimensional IRT, random item models, and more complex models of response processes such as ideal point models and tree models can potentially advance existing science and practice in these areas. As a starting point for readers interested in learning IRT and applying recent developments in IRT in their research, we provide concrete examples with data and R code. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, Volume 8 is January 21, 2021. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.

show abstract

“…The use of appropriate measurement model that corresponds to the target construct is a fundamental issue in measurement validity (Borsboom, Mellenbergh, & van Heerden, ). We note that intermediate items are needed for the accurate detection of ideal point response process (Drasgow, Chernyshenko, & Stark, ). Intermediate items refer to “statements with neutral values on the measured traits” (Cao, Drasgow, & Cho, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Apart from addressing the issue of measurement validity, it is practically important to correctly identify the response process underlying personality scales in the faking condition, as misapplication of item response models may lead to problematic scoring (Drasgow et al., ). For instance, the most commonly used scoring method is to add (or average) the endorsed response options to all items on a scale, assuming that a higher latent personality trait leads to a higher score regardless of item location.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Besides validity, researchers have also been concerned about whether faking negatively impacts hiring decisions by altering the rank orderings of the applicants, so that unqualified applicants who engaged in faking are more likely to be selected, and consequently exhibit lower performance (Mueller‐Hanson et al., ; Rosse, Stecher, Miller, & Levin, ). In both research streams, studies have almost always used average scores and traditional factor analysis to score and analyze personality scales, which implicitly assume that respondents follow a dominance response process when they fake on personality items (Drasgow et al., ). An earlier simulation study that aimed to examine the consequences of having different proportions of fakers in the sample was also based on dominance models (Zickar, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Examining the item response process to personality measures in high‐stakes situations: Issues of measurement validity and predictive validity

Zhang

Cao

Tay

et al. 2019

Personnel Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We conducted two experimental studies with between-subjects and within-subjects designs to investigate the item response process for personality measures administered in high-versus low-stakes situations. Apart from assessing measurement validity of the item response process, we examined predictive validity; that is, whether or not different response models entail differential selection outcomes. We found that ideal point response models fit slightly better than dominance response models across high-versus low-stakes situations in both studies. Additionally, fitting ideal point models to the data led to fewer items displaying differential item functioning compared to fitting dominance models. We also identified several items that functioned as intermediate items in both the faking and honest conditions when ideal point models were fitted, suggesting that ideal point model is "theoretically" more suitable across these contexts for personality inventories. However, the use of different response models (dominance vs. ideal point) did not have any substantial impact on the validity of personality measures in high-stakes situations, or the effectiveness of selection decisions such as mean performance or percent of fakers selected. These findings are significant in that although prior research supports the importance and use of ideal point models for measuring personality, we find that in the case of personality faking, though ideal point models seem to have slightly better measurement validity, the use of dominance models may be adequate with no loss to predictive validity. K E Y W O R D S dominance model, faking, ideal point model, item response process, personality assessment Personnel Psychology. 2020;73:305-332.wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/peps

show abstract

Improving the Measurement of Psychological Variables: Ideal Point Models Rock!

Cited by 6 publications

References 24 publications

Detecting Differential Item Functioning of Polytomous Items for an Ideal Point Response Process

Detecting Differential Item Functioning of Polytomous Items for an Ideal Point Response Process

The Science and Practice of Item Response Theory in Organizations

Examining the item response process to personality measures in high‐stakes situations: Issues of measurement validity and predictive validity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About