Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37810542›Full record

ArticleApplied psychological measurement2023

Comparing Person-Fit and Traditional Indices Across Careless Response Patterns in Surveys.

Eli A Jones, Stefanie A Wind, Chia-Lin Tsai, Yuan Ge

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Applied psychological measurement, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. 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

4 authors.

Eli A JonesThe University of Memphis, Memphis, TN, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0320-6341
Stefanie A WindThe University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1599-375X
Chia-Lin TsaiThe University of Northern Colorado, Greeley, CO, USA.
Yuan GeThe College Board, Yardley, PA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Methods to identify carelessness in survey research can be valuable tools in reducing bias during survey development, validation, and use. Because carelessness may take multiple forms, researchers typically use multiple indices when identifying carelessness. In the current study, we extend the literature on careless response identification by examining the usefulness of three item-response theory-based person-fit indices for both random and overconsistent careless response identification: infit

Indexed as

careless respondingclassificationperson fitRasch modelsurveys

Identifiers

PMID37810542
PMCPMC10552731

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.