Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34633890›Full record

ArticleEvolutionary psychology : an international journal of evolutionary approaches to psychology and behavior2021

Assessment of the Mate Retention Inventory-Short Form Using Item Response Theory.

Patrick J Nebl, Mark G McCoy, Garett C Foster, Michael J Zickar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Evolutionary psychology : an international journal of evolutionary approaches to psychology and behavior, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Patrick J Nebl3198Department of Psychology, Elmhurst University, Elmhurst, IL, USA.
Mark G McCoy6061Department of Psychology, Manchester University, North Manchester, IN, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0447-8610
Garett C Foster1888Department of Psychology, Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, OH, USA.
Michael J Zickar1888Department of Psychology, Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, OH, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The mate retention inventory (MRI) has been a valuable tool in the field of evolutionary psychology for the past 30 years. The goal of the current research is to subject the MRI to rigorous psychometric analysis using item response theory to answer three broad questions. Do the individual items of the MRI fit the scale well? Does the overall function of the MRI match what is predicted? Finally, do men and women respond similarly to the MRI? Using a graded response model, it was found that all but two of the items fit acceptable model patterns. Test information function analysis found that the scale acceptably captures individual differences for participants with a high degree of mate retention but the scale is lacking in capturing information from participants with a low degree of mate retention. Finally, discriminate item function analysis reveals that the MRI is better at assessing male than female participants, indicating that the scale may not be the best indicator of female behavior in a relationship. Overall, we conclude that the MRI is a good scale, especially for assessing male behavior, but it could be improved for assessing female behavior and individuals lower on overall mate retention behavior. It is suggested that this paper be used as a framework for how the newest psychometrics techniques can be applied in order to create more robust and valid measures in the field of evolutionary psychology.

Indexed as

MotivationSexual PartnersBiological EvolutionFemaleHumansMalePsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsReproductionSurveys and Questionnaireshuman matingitem response theorymate retentionpsychometricssex differences

Identifiers

PMID34633890
PMCPMC10358423

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.