↓ Skip to main content

Integration of the Forced-Choice Questionnaire and the Likert Scale: A Simulation Study

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
97 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
Integration of the Forced-Choice Questionnaire and the Likert Scale: A Simulation Study
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, May 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00806
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yue Xiao, Hongyun Liu, Hui Li

Abstract

The Thurstonian item response theory (IRT) model allows estimating the latent trait scores of respondents directly through their responses in forced-choice questionnaires. It solves a part of problems brought by the traditional scoring methods of this kind of questionnaires. However, the forced-choice designs may still have their own limitations: The model may encounter underidentification and non-convergence and the test may show low test reliability in simple test designs (e.g., test designs with only a small number of traits measured or short length). To overcome these weaknesses, the present study applied the Thurstonian IRT model and the Graded Response Model to a different test format that comprises both forced-choice blocks and Likert-type items. And the Likert items should have low social desirability. A Monte Carlo simulation study is used to investigate how the mixed response format performs under various conditions. Four factors are considered: the number of traits, test length, the percentage of Likert items, and the proportion of pairs composed of items keyed in opposite directions. Results reveal that the mixed response format can be superior to the forced-choice format, especially in simple designs where the latter performs poorly. Besides the number of Likert items needed is small. One point to note is that researchers need to choose Likert items cautiously as Likert items may bring other response biases to the test. Discussion and suggestions are given to construct personality tests that can resist faking as much as possible and have acceptable reliability.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 97 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 97 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 15%
Student > Bachelor 9 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 7%
Student > Postgraduate 5 5%
Other 12 12%
Unknown 30 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 29 30%
Business, Management and Accounting 8 8%
Social Sciences 7 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 3%
Other 14 14%
Unknown 32 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 18 May 2017.
All research outputs
#15,457,417
of 22,968,808 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#18,873
of 30,126 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#196,883
of 313,766 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#459
of 622 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,968,808 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,126 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 313,766 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 622 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.