120 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29560735)
1. Taking the Test Taker's Perspective: Response Process and Test Motivation in Multidimensional Forced-Choice Versus Rating Scale Instruments.
Sass R; Frick S; Reips UD; Wetzel E
Assessment; 2020 Apr; 27(3):572-584. PubMed ID: 29560735
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparing the validity of trait estimates from the multidimensional forced-choice format and the rating scale format.
Wetzel E; Frick S
Psychol Assess; 2020 Mar; 32(3):239-253. PubMed ID: 31738070
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Does multidimensional forced-choice prevent faking? Comparing the susceptibility of the multidimensional forced-choice format and the rating scale format to faking.
Wetzel E; Frick S; Brown A
Psychol Assess; 2021 Feb; 33(2):156-170. PubMed ID: 33151727
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Modeling Faking in the Multidimensional Forced-Choice Format: The Faking Mixture Model.
Frick S
Psychometrika; 2022 Jun; 87(2):773-794. PubMed ID: 34927219
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Investigating the Normativity of Trait Estimates from Multidimensional Forced-Choice Data.
Frick S; Brown A; Wetzel E
Multivariate Behav Res; 2023; 58(1):1-29. PubMed ID: 34464217
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. How IRT can solve problems of ipsative data in forced-choice questionnaires.
Brown A; Maydeu-Olivares A
Psychol Methods; 2013 Mar; 18(1):36-52. PubMed ID: 23148475
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. A dual process item response theory model for polytomous multidimensional forced-choice items.
Qiu X; de la Torre J
Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2023 Nov; 76(3):491-512. PubMed ID: 36967236
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Integration of the Forced-Choice Questionnaire and the Likert Scale: A Simulation Study.
Xiao Y; Liu H; Li H
Front Psychol; 2017; 8():806. PubMed ID: 28572781
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Comparison of Single-Response Format and Forced-Choice Format Instruments Using Thurstonian Item Response Theory.
Dueber DM; Love AMA; Toland MD; Turner TA
Educ Psychol Meas; 2019 Feb; 79(1):108-128. PubMed ID: 30636784
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Multidimensional IRT for forced choice tests: A literature review.
Nie L; Xu P; Hu D
Heliyon; 2024 Mar; 10(5):e26884. PubMed ID: 38449643
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Forced-choice assessments of personality for selection: evaluating issues of normative assessment and faking resistance.
Heggestad ED; Morrison M; Reeve CL; McCloy RA
J Appl Psychol; 2006 Jan; 91(1):9-24. PubMed ID: 16435935
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Adaptive testing with the GGUM-RANK multidimensional forced choice model: Comparison of pair, triplet, and tetrad scoring.
Joo SH; Lee P; Stark S
Behav Res Methods; 2020 Apr; 52(2):761-772. PubMed ID: 31342469
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Assessment of Differential Statement Functioning in Ipsative Tests With Multidimensional Forced-Choice Items.
Qiu XL; Wang WC
Appl Psychol Meas; 2021 Mar; 45(2):79-94. PubMed ID: 33627915
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. The Development and Validation of a Multidimensional Forced-Choice Format Character Measure: Testing the Thurstonian IRT Approach.
Ng V; Lee P; Ho MR; Kuykendall L; Stark S; Tay L
J Pers Assess; 2021; 103(2):224-237. PubMed ID: 32208939
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. GGUM-RANK Statement and Person Parameter Estimation With Multidimensional Forced Choice Triplets.
Lee P; Joo SH; Stark S; Chernyshenko OS
Appl Psychol Meas; 2019 May; 43(3):226-240. PubMed ID: 31019358
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Can Forced-Choice Response Format Reduce Faking of Socially Aversive Personality Traits?
Valone ALY; Meade AW
J Pers Assess; 2024 Mar; ():1-13. PubMed ID: 38501713
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The Effect of Response Format on the Psychometric Properties of the Narcissistic Personality Inventory: Consequences for Item Meaning and Factor Structure.
Ackerman RA; Donnellan MB; Roberts BW; Fraley RC
Assessment; 2016 Apr; 23(2):203-20. PubMed ID: 25616401
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Item Response Models for Forced-Choice Questionnaires: A Common Framework.
Brown A
Psychometrika; 2016 Mar; 81(1):135-60. PubMed ID: 25663304
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Fitting a Thurstonian IRT model to forced-choice data using Mplus.
Brown A; Maydeu-Olivares A
Behav Res Methods; 2012 Dec; 44(4):1135-47. PubMed ID: 22733226
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. [Schizotypal Personality Questionnaire-Brief - Likert format: Factor structure analysis in general population in France].
Ferchiou A; Todorov L; Lajnef M; Baudin G; Pignon B; Richard JR; Leboyer M; Szöke A; Schürhoff F
Encephale; 2017 Dec; 43(6):558-563. PubMed ID: 27644915
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
