ArticleJournal of Intelligence2024
A Psychometric Perspective on the Associations between Response Accuracy and Response Time Residuals.
Article in Journal of Intelligence, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
We provide an alternative psychometric perspective on the empirical statistical dependencies observed between response accuracy residuals (RARs) and response time residuals (RTRs) in the context of the van der Linden model. This perspective emphasizes the RAR (or parts of the RAR) as being exogenous and having a directional influence on response time. Our simple and theoretically justifiable perspective adds to previous joint response time/accuracy models and comports with recent generalizations of the D-diffusion IRT model incorporating person-by-item interactions, and thus similarly reproduces many of the recently highlighted empirical findings concerning the associations between RARs and RTRs. Using both empirical and simulation-based results, we show how our psychometric perspective has both applied and interpretational implications. Specifically, it would suggest that (1) studies of item parameter estimate heterogeneity in relation to response times may reflect more of a psychometric artifact (due to the exogenous effects of the RARs) as opposed to providing insights about the response process (e.g., the application of different response strategies) and that (2) efforts to use RTRs as indicators of latent proficiency should attend to the anticipated interactions between the latent proficiency and RAR on response times. The validity of our psychometric perspective against alternatives likely relies on appeals to theory; the best perspective to take may vary depending on the test setting.
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.