These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

113 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 37384461)

  • 1. The ephemeral nature of wording effects.
    Ponce FP; Torres Irribarra D; Vergés A; Arias VB
    J Pers Soc Psychol; 2023 Dec; 125(6):1472-1494. PubMed ID: 37384461
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Wording Effects in Assessment: Missing the Trees for the Forest.
    Ponce FP; Irribarra DT; Vergés A; Arias VB
    Multivariate Behav Res; 2022; 57(5):718-734. PubMed ID: 34048313
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Cognitive Abilities Explain Wording Effects in the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale.
    Gnambs T; Schroeders U
    Assessment; 2020 Mar; 27(2):404-418. PubMed ID: 29254352
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. To Reverse Item Orientation or Not to Reverse Item Orientation, That Is the Question.
    Dueber DM; Toland MD; Lingat JE; Love AMA; Qiu C; Wu R; Brown AV
    Assessment; 2022 Oct; 29(7):1422-1440. PubMed ID: 34044605
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Longitudinal tests of competing factor structures for the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale: traits, ephemeral artifacts, and stable response styles.
    Marsh HW; Scalas LF; Nagengast B
    Psychol Assess; 2010 Jun; 22(2):366-81. PubMed ID: 20528064
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Method Effects on an Adaptation of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale in Greek and the Role of Personality Traits.
    Michaelides MP; Koutsogiorgi C; Panayiotou G
    J Pers Assess; 2016; 98(2):178-88. PubMed ID: 26528728
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Multidimensional Structure or Wording Effect? Reexamination of the Factor Structure of the Chinese General Self-Efficacy Scale.
    Ou X
    J Pers Assess; 2022; 104(1):64-73. PubMed ID: 33945372
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Is the Bifactor Model a Better Model or Is It Just Better at Modeling Implausible Responses? Application of Iteratively Reweighted Least Squares to the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale.
    Reise SP; Kim DS; Mansolf M; Widaman KF
    Multivariate Behav Res; 2016; 51(6):818-838. PubMed ID: 27834509
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The bifactor structure of the Self-Compassion Scale: Bayesian approaches to overcome exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM) limitations.
    Marsh HW; Fraser MI; Rakhimov A; Ciarrochi J; Guo J
    Psychol Assess; 2023 Aug; 35(8):674-691. PubMed ID: 37410399
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. A Multilevel Bifactor Approach to Construct Validation of Mixed-Format Scales.
    Wang Y; Kim ES; Dedrick RF; Ferron JM; Tan T
    Educ Psychol Meas; 2018 Apr; 78(2):253-271. PubMed ID: 29795955
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. An examination of the wording effect in the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale among culturally Chinese people.
    Wu CH
    J Soc Psychol; 2008 Oct; 148(5):535-51. PubMed ID: 18958975
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Bifactor Model Is Not the Best-Fitting Model for Self-Esteem: Investigation With a Novel Technique.
    Kam CCS
    Assessment; 2021 Oct; 28(7):1799-1812. PubMed ID: 32917100
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Positive and negative global self-esteem: a substantively meaningful distinction or artifactors?
    Marsh HW
    J Pers Soc Psychol; 1996 Apr; 70(4):810-9. PubMed ID: 8636900
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. On the factor structure of the Rosenberg (1965) General Self-Esteem Scale.
    Alessandri G; Vecchione M; Eisenberg N; Łaguna M
    Psychol Assess; 2015 Jun; 27(2):621-35. PubMed ID: 25580614
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Examining the factor structure of the Self-Compassion Scale in 20 diverse samples: Support for use of a total score and six subscale scores.
    Neff KD; Tóth-Király I; Yarnell LM; Arimitsu K; Castilho P; Ghorbani N; Guo HX; Hirsch JK; Hupfeld J; Hutz CS; Kotsou I; Lee WK; Montero-Marin J; Sirois FM; de Souza LK; Svendsen JL; Wilkinson RB; Mantzios M
    Psychol Assess; 2019 Jan; 31(1):27-45. PubMed ID: 30124303
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A constrained factor mixture analysis model for consistent and inconsistent respondents to mixed-worded scales.
    Steinmann I; Strietholt R; Braeken J
    Psychol Methods; 2022 Aug; 27(4):667-702. PubMed ID: 33829811
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Raters Interpret Positively and Negatively Worded Items Similarly in a Quality of Life Instrument for Children.
    Lin CY; Strong C; Tsai MC; Lee CT
    Inquiry; 2017 Jan; 54():46958017696724. PubMed ID: 28292193
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Using Constrained Factor Mixture Analysis to Validate Mixed-Worded Psychological Scales: The Case of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale in the Dominican Republic.
    García-Batista ZE; Guerra-Peña K; Garrido LE; Cantisano-Guzmán LM; Moretti L; Cano-Vindel A; Arias VB; Medrano LA
    Front Psychol; 2021; 12():636693. PubMed ID: 34489774
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The Chinese Internalized Binegativity Scale: Measure development and cultural adaptation.
    Wei C; Israel T
    J Couns Psychol; 2023 Nov; 70(6):657-670. PubMed ID: 37603000
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.