Weitere Kapitel dieses Buchs durch Wischen aufrufen
The purpose of this study is to compare the dominance and ideal-point response process models for a trust in science measure developed from Thurstone’s (Am J Sociol 33(4):529–554, 1928; Psychol Rev 36(3):222–241, 1929) scaling procedures. The trust in science scale was scored in four different ways: (1) a dominance response approach using observed scores, (2) a dominance response approach using model-based trait estimates, (3) an ideal-point response observed score approach using Thurstone scoring, and (4) an ideal-point response approach using model-based trait estimates. Comparisons were made between the four approaches in terms of psychometric properties and correlations with political beliefs, education level, and beliefs about scientific consensus in a convenience sample of 401 adults. Results suggest that both the ideal-point and two-parameter IRT models fit equally well in terms of overall model fit. However, two items demonstrated poor item fit in the two-parameter model. Correlations with political beliefs, education level, and science-related items revealed very little differences in magnitude across the four scoring procedures. This study shows support for the flexibility of the ideal-point IRT model for capturing non-ideal-point response patterns. The study also demonstrates the use of using IRT to examine item parameters and item fit.
Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten
Sie möchten Zugang zu diesem Inhalt erhalten? Dann informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:
Borman, W. C., Penner, L. A., Allen, T. D., & Motowidlo, S. J. (2001). Personality predictors of citizenship performance. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 9(1–2), 52–69.
Chernyshenko, O. S., Stark, S., Drasgow, F., & Roberts, B. W. (2007). Constructing personality scales under the assumptions of an ideal point response process: Toward increasing the flexibility of personality measures. Psychological Assessment, 19(1), 88–106. CrossRef
Chernyshenko, O. S., Stark, S., Prewett, M. S., Gray, A. A., Stilson, F. R., & Tuttle, M. D. (2009). Normative scoring of multidimensional pairwise preference personality scales using IRT: Empirical comparisons with other formats. Human Performance, 22(2), 105–127. CrossRef
Coombs, C. H. (1964). A theory of data. New York: Wiley.
Drasgow, F., Chernyshenko, O. S., & Stark, S. (2009). Test theory and personality measurement. Oxford Handbook of Personality Assessment, 59–80.
Drasgow, F., Chernyshenko, O. S., & Stark, S. (2010). 75 years after Likert: Thurstone was right! Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 3(4), 465–476. CrossRef
Funk, C., & Rainie, L. (2015). Americans, politics, and science issues. Retrieved from: http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/07/01/americans-politics-and-science-issues/.
Likert, R. (1932). A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of Psychology, 140, 5–53.
Maydeu-Olivares, A., Hernández, A., & McDonald, R. P. (2006). A multidimensional ideal point item response theory model for binary data. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 41(4), 445–472. CrossRef
Roberts, J. S., Donoghue, J. R., & Laughlin, J. E. (2000). A general item response theory model for unfolding unidimensional polytomous responses. Applied Psychological Measurement, 24(1), 3–32. CrossRef
Roberts, J. S., & Laughlin, J. E. (1996). A unidimensional item response model for unfolding responses from a graded disagree-agree response scale. Applied Psychological Measurement, 20(3), 231–255. CrossRef
Stark, S., Chernyshenko, O. S., Drasgow, F., & Williams, B. A. (2006). Examining assumptions about item responding in personality assessment: Should ideal point methods be considered for scale development and scoring? Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(1), 25–39. CrossRef
Thurstone, L. L. (1928). Attitudes can be measured. American Journal of Sociology, 33(4), 529–554. CrossRef
Thurstone, L. L. (1929). Theory of attitude measurement. Psychological Review, 36(3), 222–241. CrossRef
Thurstone, T. G. (1932). The difficulty of a test and its diagnostic value. Journal of Educational Psychology, 23(5), 335. CrossRef
Tourangeau, R., Rips, L. J., & Rasinski, K. (2000). The Psychology of Survey Response. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- A Comparison of Ideal-Point and Dominance Response Processes with a Trust in Science Thurstone Scale
Neuer Inhalt/© ITandMEDIA