↓ Skip to main content

Simple construct evaluation with latent class analysis: An investigation of Facebook addiction and the development of a short form of the Facebook Addiction Test (F-AT)

Overview of attention for article published in Behavior Research Methods, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
53 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Simple construct evaluation with latent class analysis: An investigation of Facebook addiction and the development of a short form of the Facebook Addiction Test (F-AT)
Published in
Behavior Research Methods, March 2016
DOI 10.3758/s13428-016-0716-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael Dantlgraber, Eunike Wetzel, Petra Schützenberger, Stefan Stieger, Ulf-Dietrich Reips

Abstract

In psychological research, there is a growing interest in using latent class analysis (LCA) for the investigation of quantitative constructs. The aim of this study is to illustrate how LCA can be applied to gain insights on a construct and to select items during test development. We show the added benefits of LCA beyond factor-analytic methods, namely being able (1) to describe groups of participants that differ in their response patterns, (2) to determine appropriate cutoff values, (3) to evaluate items, and (4) to evaluate the relative importance of correlated factors. As an example, we investigated the construct of Facebook addiction using the Facebook Addiction Test (F-AT), an adapted version of the Internet Addiction Test (I-AT). Applying LCA facilitates the development of new tests and short forms of established tests. We present a short form of the F-AT based on the LCA results and validate the LCA approach and the short F-AT with several external criteria, such as chatting, reading newsfeeds, and posting status updates. Finally, we discuss the benefits of LCA for evaluating quantitative constructs in psychological research.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 2%
Unknown 52 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 15%
Student > Master 8 15%
Researcher 7 13%
Student > Bachelor 4 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 8%
Other 12 23%
Unknown 10 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 22 42%
Social Sciences 7 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 9%
Computer Science 2 4%
Mathematics 1 2%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 11 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 June 2017.
All research outputs
#15,740,207
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Behavior Research Methods
#1,422
of 2,525 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#163,461
of 312,601 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Behavior Research Methods
#18
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,525 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 312,601 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.