Psychometric benefits of self-chosen rating scales over given rating scales

被引:0
|
作者
Kutscher, Tanja [1 ]
Eid, Michael [2 ]
机构
[1] Leibniz Inst Educ Trajectories, Dept Res Data Ctr, Methods Dev Scaling & Test Design, Wilhelmspl 3, D-96047 Bamberg, Germany
[2] Free Univ Berlin, Div Methods & Evaluat, Dept Psychol, Habelschwerdter Allee 45, D-14195 Berlin, Germany
关键词
Flourishing scale; Self-chosen rating scale; Inappropriate category use; Response styles; Mixture distribution IRT approach; EXTREME-RESPONSE STYLE; FORCED-CHOICE FORMAT; FACTORIAL STRUCTURE; MARKETING-RESEARCH; AGREE-DISAGREE; OPTIMAL NUMBER; BIAS; ACQUIESCENCE; PERSONALITY; POINTS;
D O I
10.3758/s13428-024-02429-w
中图分类号
B841 [心理学研究方法];
学科分类号
040201 ;
摘要
Rating scales are susceptible to response styles that undermine the scale quality. Optimizing a rating scale can tailor it to individuals' cognitive abilities, thereby preventing the occurrence of response styles related to a suboptimal response format. However, the discrimination ability of individuals in a sample may vary, suggesting that different rating scales may be appropriate for different individuals. This study aims to examine (1) whether response styles can be avoided when individuals are allowed to choose a rating scale and (2) whether the psychometric properties of self-chosen rating scales improve compared to given rating scales. To address these objectives, data from the flourishing scale were used as an illustrative example. MTurk workers from Amazon's Mechanical Turk platform (N = 7042) completed an eight-item flourishing scale twice: (1) using a randomly assigned four-, six-, or 11-point rating scale, and (2) using a self-chosen rating scale. Applying the restrictive mixed generalized partial credit model (rmGPCM) allowed examination of category use across the conditions. Correlations with external variables were calculated to assess the effects of the rating scales on criterion validity. The results revealed consistent use of self-chosen rating scales, with approximately equal proportions of the three response styles. Ordinary response behavior was observed in 55-58% of individuals, which was an increase of 12-15% compared to assigned rating scales. The self-chosen rating scales also exhibited superior psychometric properties. The implications of these findings are discussed.
引用
收藏
页码:7440 / 7464
页数:25
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] RATING SCALES IN DETECTION EXPERIMENTS
    LARKIN, WD
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE ACOUSTICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA, 1965, 37 (04): : 748 - &
  • [42] Knee injury rating scales
    Lysholm, Jack
    Tegner, Yelverton
    [J]. ACTA ORTHOPAEDICA, 2007, 78 (04) : 445 - 453
  • [43] RATING SCALES FOR AUDITORIUM ACOUSTICS
    WATTERS, BG
    BERANEK, LL
    SCHULTZ, TJ
    JOHNSON, R
    KIRKEGAA.RL
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE ACOUSTICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA, 1970, 48 (01): : 79 - &
  • [44] SCALES FOR RATING TASTE OF WATER
    BRUVOLD, WH
    [J]. JOURNAL OF APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY, 1968, 52 (03) : 245 - &
  • [45] RATING DEPRESSION AND ANXIETY AFTER MASTECTOMY - OBSERVER VERSUS SELF-RATING SCALES
    GRANDI, S
    FAVA, GA
    CUNSOLO, A
    SAVIOTTI, FM
    RANIERI, M
    TROMBINI, G
    GOZZETTI, G
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRY IN MEDICINE, 1990, 20 (02): : 163 - 171
  • [46] COMPARATIVE VALUE OF RATING SCALES
    HAMILTON, M
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY, 1976, 3 (01) : 58 - 60
  • [47] Psychometric Properties of Figure Rating Scales in Children: The Impact of Figure Ordering
    Zitzmann, Jana
    Warschburger, Petra
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY ASSESSMENT, 2020, 102 (02) : 259 - 268
  • [48] PSYCHOMETRIC TESTS AND RATING-SCALES FOR GERONTO-PSYCHOLOGICAL PROBLEMS
    OSWALD, WD
    [J]. ZEITSCHRIFT FUR GERONTOLOGIE, 1979, 12 (04): : 341 - 350
  • [49] Application of psychometric theory to the measurement of voice quality using rating scales
    Shrivastav, R
    Sapienza, CM
    Nandur, V
    [J]. JOURNAL OF SPEECH LANGUAGE AND HEARING RESEARCH, 2005, 48 (02): : 323 - 335
  • [50] RATING SCALES FOR MUSICAL INTERESTS
    Farnsworth, Paul R.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY, 1949, 28 (01): : 245 - 253