ArticleBehavior research methods2024
Dimensionality assessment in the presence of wording effects: A network psychometric and factorial approach.
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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Disentangling substantive and method variance in mixed-worded scales: An empirical application of the random intercept item factor analysis (RIIFA).Behavior research methods · 2026Article
- Confidence in mathematics is confounded by responses to reverse-coded items.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- Development and validation of an HPV infection knowledge assessment scale among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples.Vaccine: X · 2023Article
- The Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction and Frustration Scales probably do not validly measure need frustration.Psychological assessment · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study proposes a procedure for substantive dimensionality estimation in the presence of wording effects, the inconsistent response to regular and reversed self-report items. The procedure developed consists of subtracting an approximate estimate of the wording effects variance from the sample correlation matrix and then estimating the substantive dimensionality on the residual correlation matrix. This is achieved by estimating a random intercept factor with unit loadings for all the regular and unrecoded reversed items. The accuracy of the procedure was evaluated through an extensive simulation study that manipulated nine relevant variables and employed the exploratory graph analysis (EGA) and parallel analysis (PA) retention methods. The results indicated that combining the proposed procedure with EGA or PA achieved high accuracy in estimating the substantive latent dimensionality, but that EGA was superior. Additionally, the present findings shed light on the complex ways that wording effects impact the dimensionality estimates when the response bias in the data is ignored. A tutorial on substantive dimensionality estimation with the R package EGAnet is offered, as well as practical guidelines for applied researchers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38379114What 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.