ArticleBehavior research methods2024
Unipolar IRT and the Author Recognition Test (ART).
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Using the multidimensional nominal response model to model faking in questionnaire data: The importance of item desirability characteristics.Behavior research methods · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Item response theory (IRT) analyses are often used to evaluate measurement error in educational and psychological test instruments. In such contexts, the latent traits/proficiencies are typically assumed normally distributed and a cumulative normal/logistic measurement link function is applied. Such choices are consistent with constructs that are viewed as bipolar in nature and play a critical role in defining the latent proficiency metric against which the measurement error in the test is evaluated. Recently, alternative models that portray the construct as unipolar have been highlighted as being more appropriate for certain psychopathology and personality constructs. In this paper we extend consideration of unipolar IRT models for a recognition task measure, using several example datasets from various versions of the Author Recognition Test (ART), a measure of print exposure. We show how the decision between unipolar versus bipolar IRT modeling has substantial implications for the quantification and interpretation of measurement error in the ART. In sharp contrast to prior bipolar IRT analyses of the ART, under unipolar IRT measurement error in the ART is minimized at low levels of latent print exposure, and increases as latent print exposure increases. Implications for consideration of unipolar IRT with other constructs and measures (e.g., vocabulary, specialized forms of knowledge) that reflect a similar type of response process are considered in the discussion.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37973711What 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.