ArticleBehavior research methods2024
An item response theory analysis of the matrix reasoning item bank (MaRs-IB).
Article in Behavior research methods, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Task Engagement in Matrix Reasoning Performance: A Cross-Cultural Investigation in China and the United Kingdom.Journal of Intelligence · 2026Article
- Protocol for a randomized trial to predict the efficacy of cognitive and behavioral interventions for symptoms of depression.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Automatic- and Transformer-Based Automatic Item Generation: A Critical Review.Journal of Intelligence · 2025Review
- Polytomous explanatory item response models for item discrimination: Assessing negative-framing effects in social-emotional learning surveys.Behavior research methods · 2025Article
- Validation of the Children's International Cognitive Ability Resource (Ch-ICAR).Behavior research methods · 2025Article
- Instrumental music training relates to intensity assessment but not emotional prosody recognition in Mandarin.PloS one · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Matrix reasoning tasks are among the most widely used measures of cognitive ability in the behavioral sciences, but the lack of matrix reasoning tests in the public domain complicates their use. Here, we present an extensive investigation and psychometric validation of the matrix reasoning item bank (MaRs-IB), an open-access set of matrix reasoning items. In a first study, we calibrate the psychometric functioning of the items in the MaRs-IB in a large sample of adult participants (N = 1501). Using additive multilevel item structure models, we establish that the MaRs-IB has many desirable psychometric properties: its items span a wide range of difficulty, possess medium-to-large levels of discrimination, and exhibit robust associations between item complexity and difficulty. However, we also find that item clones are not always psychometrically equivalent and cannot be assumed to be exchangeable. In a second study, we demonstrate how experimenters can use the estimated item parameters to design new matrix reasoning tests using optimal item assembly. Specifically, we design and validate two new sets of test forms in an independent sample of adults (N = 600). We find these new tests possess good reliability and convergent validity with an established measure of matrix reasoning. We hope that the materials and results made available here will encourage experimenters to use the MaRs-IB in their research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.