Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40518835›Full record

ArticlePsychometrika2025

Accounting for Persistence in Tests with Linear Ballistic Accumulator Models.

Jochen Ranger, Sören Much, Niklas Neek, Augustin Mutak, Steffi Pohl

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychometrika, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

5 authors.

Jochen RangerDepartment of Psychology, https://ror.org/05gqaka33Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg, Halle, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5110-1213
Sören MuchDepartment of Psychology, https://ror.org/05gqaka33Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg, Halle, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9837-8073
Niklas NeekDepartment of Psychology, https://ror.org/05gqaka33Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg, Halle, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-7736-6735
Augustin MutakFaculty of Education and Psychology, https://ror.org/00mv6sv71Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9003-1166
Steffi PohlFaculty of Education and Psychology, https://ror.org/00mv6sv71Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5178-8171

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this article, we propose a series of latent trait models for the responses and the response times on low stakes tests where some test takers respond preliminary without making full effort to solve the items. The models consider individual differences in capability and persistence. Core of the models is a race between the solution process and a process of disengagement that interrupts the solution process. The different processes are modeled with the linear ballistic accumulator model. Within this general framework, we develop different model variants that differ in the number of accumulators and the way the response is generated when the solution process is interrupted. We distinguish no guessing, random guessing and informed guessing where the guessing probability depends on the status of the solution process. We conduct simulation studies on parameter recovery and on trait estimation. The simulation study suggests that parameter values and traits can be recovered well under certain conditions. Finally, we apply the model variants to empirical data.

Indexed as

item response theorylinear ballistic accumulatorrapid guessingresponse time

Identifiers

PMID40518835
PMCPMC12483707

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.