ArticleInformation systems research : ISR2025
The ITEM Ontology: A Tool to Elucidate the Anatomy of Psychometric Indicators.
Article in Information systems research : ISR, 2025. 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Survey-based research in information systems requires valid scales to advance theory, and the discipline has developed rigorous procedures to assess scale validity. In principle, these procedures ensure that scales consist of clear indicators and faithfully represent the focal construct. However, the focus on the psychometric properties of scales has overshadowed the role of lexical and semantic elements in the validation process, leading to invalid scales. This overemphasis on psychometric properties will persist unless researchers have a systematic approach to analyzing the properties of indicators and share the outcome of such analyses in formats that can be peer-reviewed, critiqued, or corroborated by other researchers. Thus, the psychometric community needs a shared language and method to uncover the properties of indicators and identify validity problems that psychometric analysis fails to detect. Drawing on ontology development methods, we propose the Indicator Terminology for Explanation and Measurement (ITEM) Ontology, consisting of four high-level hierarchies of entities: objects, measurables, qualifiers, and response sets, each almost always found within an individual indicator. We develop an approach, a codebook, and a website for applying ITEM to psychometric indicators. Common approaches to ontology evaluation are then used to evaluate its expressiveness, utility, importance, accessibility, suitability, and external validity. We find that the ITEM Ontology is highly generative in that it can be used to address several previously unsolvable problems in survey science, polling, and theory testing.
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.