ArticlePloS one2024
The Inventory of Personality Organization-Reality Testing Subscale and Belief in Science Scale: Confirmatory factor and Rasch analysis of thinking style measures.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Distinguishing paranormal belief and paranormal involvement: canonical correlation analysis of positive psychological functioning.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Mind over matter? The cognitive styles of scientific scepticism and paranormal belief.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Inventory of Personality Organization-Reality Testing Subscale (IPO-RT) and Belief in Science Scale (BIS) represent indirect, proxy measures of intuitive-experiential and analytical-rational thinking. However, a limited appraisal of factorial structure exists, and assessment of person-item functioning has not occurred. This study assessed the IPO-RT and BIS using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and Rasch analysis with a sample of 1030 participants (465 males, 565 females). Correlation analysis revealed a negative, moderate relationship between the measures. CFA supported a bifactorial model of the IPO-RT with four bifactors (Auditory and Visual Hallucinations, Delusional Thinking, Social Deficits, and Confusion). A one-factor model best fitted the BIS. Satisfactory item/person reliability and unidimensionality was observed for both measures using Rasch analysis, and items generally exhibited gender invariance. However, IPO-RT items were challenging, whereas BIS items were relatively easy to endorse. Overall, results indicated that the IPO-RT and BIS are conceptually sound, indirect indices of intuitive-experiential and analytical-rational thinking. Acknowledging the breadth of these thinking styles, a useful future research focus includes evaluating the performance of IPO-RT and BIS alongside objective tests.
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.