Publicación:
Comparing Traditional and IRT Scoring of Forced-Choice Tests

Vista sencilla de ítem
dc.contributor.authorHontangas, Pedro M.
dc.contributor.authorde la Torre, Jimmy
dc.contributor.authorPonsoda, Vicente
dc.contributor.authorLeenen, Iwin
dc.contributor.authorAbad, Francisco J.
dc.contributor.authorMorillo Cuadrado, Daniel Vicente
dc.date.accessioned2024-12-05T12:00:49Z
dc.date.available2024-12-05T12:00:49Z
dc.date.issued2015-05-19
dc.descriptionLa versión registrada de este artículo, publicado por primera vez en Comparing Traditional and IRT Scoring of Forced-Choice Tests. Applied Psychological Measurement, 39(8), 598-612, está disponible en línea en el sitio web del editor: https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621615585851 The recorded version of this article, first published in Comparing Traditional and IRT Scoring of Forced-Choice Tests. Applied Psychological Measurement, 39(8), 598-612, is available online at the publisher's website: https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621615585851
dc.description.abstractThis 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.en
dc.description.versionversión publicada
dc.identifier.citationHontangas, P. M., de la Torre, J., Ponsoda, V., Leenen, I., Morillo, D., & Abad, F. J. (2015). Comparing Traditional and IRT Scoring of Forced-Choice Tests. Applied Psychological Measurement, 39(8), 598-612. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621615585851
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1177/0146621615585851
dc.identifier.issn0146-6216; eISSN: 1552-3497
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14468/24724
dc.journal.issue8
dc.journal.titleApplied Psychological Measurement
dc.journal.volume39
dc.language.isoen
dc.page.final612
dc.page.initial598
dc.publisherSAGE Publications
dc.relation.centerFacultad de Psicología
dc.relation.departmentMetodología de las Ciencias del Comportamiento
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.es
dc.subject61 Psicología
dc.subject.keywordsforced choiceen
dc.subject.keywordsipsative dataen
dc.subject.keywordsmulti-unidimensional pairwise-preferenceen
dc.subject.keywordsMUPPen
dc.subject.keywordsunfolding modelen
dc.subject.keywordsGGUMen
dc.subject.keywordsEAPen
dc.subject.keywordstraditional scoringen
dc.subject.keywordspersonality assessmenten
dc.subject.keywordsfakingen
dc.titleComparing Traditional and IRT Scoring of Forced-Choice Testsen
dc.typeartículoes
dc.typejournal articleen
dspace.entity.typePublication
relation.isAuthorOfPublicationeaf86785-e049-4e6e-a3cc-0409c8954333
relation.isAuthorOfPublication.latestForDiscoveryeaf86785-e049-4e6e-a3cc-0409c8954333
Archivos
Bloque original
Mostrando 1 - 1 de 1
Miniatura
Nombre:
MorilloCuadrado_Daniel_Comparing_traditional.pdf
Tamaño:
253.91 KB
Formato:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Descargar
Bloque de licencias
Mostrando 1 - 1 de 1
No hay miniatura disponible
Nombre:
license.txt
Tamaño:
3.62 KB
Formato:
Item-specific license agreed to upon submission
Descripción:
Descargar
Colecciones
Artículos y papers