Steps for the construction of rank type forced choice instruments

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15448/1980-8623.2024.1.40882

Keywords:

Desejabilidade Social, Psicometria, Validade dos Testes

Abstract

Instruments in the forced choice format have been shown to be very useful in preventing the falsification of responses. However, even knowing that the advantage of controlling this bias is quite useful in several contexts of the psychologist’s performance, the number of psychological instruments in this format and Brazilian articles on this theme is still scarce. The purpose of the present article is to foster this discussion, providing information on the main stages in the construction of an instrument of forced choice of the RANK type scale in order to assist researchers in the process of execution of this scale. The paper discusses some topics regarding the stages of the creation of the blocks and the way of analysing the social desirability of the items.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Paloma Pereira de Almeida, Freelance researcher, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.

PhD in Psychology from the Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro (PUC-Rio), in Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil; Master in Psychology from the Federal University of Pernambuco (UFPE), in Recife, PE, Brazil. Professor at the Getúlio Vargas Foundation (FGV), in Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil; Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro (PUC-Rio), in Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil; and University of São Paulo / Luiz de Queiroz College of Agriculture (USP/Esalq), in Piracicaba, SP, Brazil. Consultant at ASeleta – a consultancy specialized in people management and leadership.

Juliane Callegaro Borsa, Freelance researcher, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.

PhD in Psychology from the Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), in Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil; Master in Psychology from the Pontifical Catholic University of Rio Grande do Sul (PUCRS), in Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil. Psychologist in private practice.

J. Landeira-Fernandez, Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro (PUC-Rio), Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.

PhD in Neuroscience and Behavior from the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA), in Los Angeles, United States; Master in Psychology from the University of São Paulo (USP), in São Paulo, SP, Brazil. Full Professor in the Department of Psychology at the Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro (PUC-Rio), in Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil. Researcher at CNPq and Scientist of Our State by FAPERJ.

References

Alexandre, N. M. C., & Coluci, M. Z. O. (2011). Validade de conteúdo nos processos de construção e adaptação de instrumentos de medidas. Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, 16(7), p. 3061-3068. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1413-81232011000800006

American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, National Council on Measurement in Education. (2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing (6. ed.). American Educational Research Association.

Borsa, J. C., & Size, M. M. (2017). Construção e Adaptação de Instrumentos Psicológicos: dois caminhos possíveis. In B. F. Damásio, & J. C. Borsa, Manual de Desenvolvimento de Instrumentos Psicológicos (pp. 15-37). Vetor.

Brown, A. (2014). Item Response Models for Forced-Choice Questionnaires: A Common Framework. Psychometrika, 81(1), 135-160. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-014-9434-9

Brown, A., & Maydeu-Olivares, A. (2011). Item Response Modeling of Forced-Choice Questionnaires. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 71(3), 460-502. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164410375112

Brown, A., & Maydeu-Olivares, A. (2012). Fitting a Thurstonian IRT model to forced-choice data using Mplus. Behavior Research Methods, 44(4), 1135-1147. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-012-0217-x

Brown, A., & Maydeu-Olivares, A. (2013). How IRT Can Solve Problems of Ipsative Data in Forced-Choice Questionnaires. Psychological Methods, 18(1), 36-52. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030641

Brown, A., & Maydeu-Olivares, A. (2018). Modeling forced-choice response formats. In P. Irwing, T. Booth, & D. Hughes (Eds.), The Wiley Handbook of Psychometric Testing (pp. 1-64). John Wiley & Sons.

Cao, M., & Drasgow, F. (2019). Does forcing reduce faking? A meta-analytic review of forced-choice personality measures in high-stakes situations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 104(11), 1347-1368. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000414

Carvalho, L. F., & Ambiel, R. A. (2017). Construção de Instrumentos Psicológicos. In B. F. Damásio, & J. C. Borsa, Manual de Desenvolvimento de Instrumentos Psicológicos (pp. 39-55). Vetor.

Clark, L. A., & Watson, D. (2019). Constructing validity: New developments in creating objective measuring instruments. Psychological assessment, 31(12), 1412-1427. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000626

Damásio, B. F., & Dutra, D. F. (2017). Análise Fatorial Exploratória: um tutorial com o software factor. In B. F. Damásio, & J. C. Borsa, Manual de Desenvolvimento de Instrumentos Psicológicos (pp. 241-265). Vetor.

Franco, V. R., Valentini, F., & Iglesias, F. (2017). Introdução à Análise Fatorial Confirmatória. In B. F. Damásio, & J. C. Borsa, Manual de Desenvolvimento de Instrumentos Psicológicos (pp. 295-322). Vetor.

Gwet, K. L. (2008). Computing inter-rater reliability and its variance in the presence of high agreement. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 61(1), 29-48. https://doi.org/10.1348/000711006X126600

Hallquist, M. N., & Wiley, J. F. (2018). MplusAutomation: An R Package for Facilitating Large-Scale Latent Variable Analyses in Mplus. Structural Equation Modeling, 25(4), 621-638. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2017.1402334

Hernández-Nieto, R. A. (2002). Contributions to statistical analysis. Universidade de Los Andes.

Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159-174.

Pacico, J. C. (2015). Como é Feito um Teste? Produção de Itens. In Hutz, C. S., Bandeira, D. R., & Trentini, C. M. (Orgs.) Psicometria (pp. 55-70). Artmed.

Petrides, K. V., Furnham, A., & Mavroveli, S. (2007). Trait emotional intelligence: Moving forward in the field of EI. In G. Matthews, M. Zeidner, & R. D. Roberts (Eds.), Series in affective science. The science of emotional intelligence: Knowns and unknowns (pp. 151-166). Oxford University Press.

Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2006). The Content Validity Index: are you know what’s being reported? Critique and recommendations. Research in Nursing & Health, 29, 489-497.

R Core Team. (2019). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.r-project.org

Roger-Welter, G. M. (2014) Teste HumanGuide – Manual (Vol. 1.).

Roger-Welter, G. M., & Capitão, C. G. (2007). Medidas Ipsativas na Avaliação Psicológica. Avaliação Psicológica, 6(2), 157-165. http://pepsic.bvsalud.org/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1677-04712007000200006&lng=pt&tlng=pt

Shrout, P. E., & Fleiss, J. L. (1979). Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing reliability. Psychological Bulletin, 86(2), 420-428.

Siegel, S., & Castellan, H. J. (2006). Estatística não paramétrica para ciências do comportamento (2. ed.). Artmed.

Sivo, S. A., Fan, X., Witta, E. L., & Willse, J. T. (2006). The search for "optimal" cutoff properties: Fit index criteria in structural equation modeling. The Journal of Experimental Education, 74(3), 267-288. https://doi.org/10.3200/JEXE.74.3.267-288

Thurstone, L. L. (1927). A law of comparative judgment. Psychological Review, 34(4), 273-286. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0070288

Thurstone, L. L. (1931). Rank order as a psychophysical method. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 14(3), 187-201. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0070025

Valentini, F. (2018). Modelo latente para itens de escolha forçada. Avaliação Psicológica, 17(1), 1-2. http://dx.doi.org/10.15689/ap.2017.1701.ed

Zacharias, J. J. M. (2000). QUATI: Questionário de Avaliação Tipológica (versão II). Vetor.

Downloads

Published

2024-10-22

How to Cite

Pereira de Almeida, P., Callegaro Borsa, J., & Landeira-Fernandez, J. (2024). Steps for the construction of rank type forced choice instruments. Psico, 55(1), e40882. https://doi.org/10.15448/1980-8623.2024.1.40882

Issue

Vol. 55 No. 1 (2024): Single Volume - Continuous flow

Section

Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2024 Psico

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.