Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34565816›Full record

ArticleEducational and psychological measurement2021

Nominal Factor Analysis of Situational Judgment Tests: Evaluation of Latent Dimensionality and Factorial Invariance.

Javier Revuelta, Alicia Franco-Martínez, Carmen Ximénez

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Educational and psychological measurement, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Development and Validation of the Mexican Public Open Spaces Tool (MexPOS).International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Javier RevueltaUniversidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4705-6282
Alicia Franco-MartínezUniversidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9710-1240
Carmen XiménezUniversidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1337-6309

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Situational judgment tests have gained popularity in educational and psychological measurement and are widely used in personnel assessment. A situational judgment item presents a hypothetical scenario and a list of actions, and the individuals are asked to select their most likely action for that scenario. Because actions have no explicit order, the item generates nominal responses consisting of the actions selected by the individuals. This article shows how to factor-analyze the nominal responses originated from such a test, including the estimation of the number of latent factors and a factor invariance analysis in a multiple group design. The method consists of applying the MNCM, a multidimensional extension of the nominal categories model by Bock. The article includes the results of two studies: (1) a simulation study about Type-I error rate, statistical power, and recovery of the parameters in a multigroup factorial invariance design and (2) a real data example using responses to a situational judgment test measuring gender stereotypes to illustrate the approach. Results suggest the use of the Akaike information criterion, Bayesian information criterion, and corrected Bayesian information criterion indices to guide the selection of the number of factors with nominal responses. All the analyses are conducted using the computer program

Indexed as

gender stereotypesMonte Carlo simulationmultidimensional nominal categories modelmultigroup factor analysisnominal factor analysissituational judgment test

Identifiers

PMID34565816
PMCPMC8451019

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.