Revisiting the Effect of Varying the Number of Response Alternatives in Clinical Assessment: Evidence From Measuring ADHD Symptoms

Author:

Shi Dexin1ORCID,Siceloff E. Rebekah1,Castellanos Rebeca E.1,Bridges Rachel M.1,Jiang Zhehan2,Flory Kate1ORCID,Benson Kari3ORCID

Affiliation:

1. University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, USA

2. Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA

3. Ohio University, Athens, OH, USA

Abstract

This study illustrated the effect of varying the number of response alternatives in clinical assessment using a within-participant, repeated-measures approach. Participants reported the presence of current attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder symptoms using both a binary and a polytomous (4-point) rating scale across two counterbalanced administrations of the Current Symptoms Scale (CSS). Psychometric properties of the CSS were examined using (a) self-reported binary, (b) self-reported 4-point ratings obtained from each administration of the CSS, and (c) artificially dichotomized responses derived from observed 4-point ratings. Under the same ordinal factor analysis model, results indicated that the number of response alternatives affected item parameter estimates, standard errors, goodness of fit indices, individuals’ test scores, and reliability of the test scores. With fewer response alternatives, the precision of the measurement decreased, and the power of using the goodness-of-fit indices to detect model misfit decreased. These findings add to recent research advocating for the inclusion of a large number of response alternatives in the development of clinical assessments and further suggest that researchers should be cautious about reducing the number of response categories in data analysis.

Funder

University of South Carolina Magellan Scholar Program

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Applied Psychology,Clinical Psychology

Reference11 articles.

Cited by 3 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3