Rating Scale Analysis

1999 ◽  
pp. 110-121 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Andrich
Keyword(s):  
Rating Scale ◽  
Scale Analysis

Mokken Scale Analysis: Discussion and Application

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 672-695
Author(s):  
Thomas DeVaney
Keyword(s):  
Item Response Theory ◽  
Item Response ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Scale Analysis ◽  
Guttman Scale ◽  
Response Theory ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Mokken Scale Analysis ◽  
Irt Models ◽  
Guttman Scaling

This article presents a discussion and illustration of Mokken scale analysis (MSA), a nonparametric form of item response theory (IRT), in relation to common IRT models such as Rasch and Guttman scaling. The procedure can be used for dichotomous and ordinal polytomous data commonly used with questionnaires. The assumptions of MSA are discussed as well as characteristics that differentiate a Mokken scale from a Guttman scale. MSA is illustrated using the mokken package with R Studio and a data set that included over 3,340 responses to a modified version of the Statistical Anxiety Rating Scale. Issues addressed in the illustration include monotonicity, scalability, and invariant ordering. The R script for the illustration is included.

Rating Scale Analysis of the Agitated Behavior Scale

2000 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 656-669 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer A. Bogner ◽  
John D. Corrigan ◽  
Rita K. Bode ◽  
Allen W. Heinemann
Keyword(s):  
Rating Scale ◽  
Scale Analysis ◽  
Behavior Scale

The unidimensionality of evil: A rating scale analysis of the short dark triad

2021 ◽  
Vol 168 ◽  
pp. 110376
Author(s):  
Bruno Bonfá-Araujo ◽  
Natália Costa Simões ◽  
Samanta Romanin Zuchetto ◽  
Nelson Hauck-Filho
Keyword(s):  
Rating Scale ◽  
Dark Triad ◽  
Scale Analysis

scholarly journals Comparing sensitivity to change using the 6-item versus the 17-item Hamilton depression rating scale in the GUIDED randomized controlled trial

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Boadie W. Dunlop ◽  
Sagar V. Parikh ◽  
Anthony J. Rothschild ◽  
Michael E. Thase ◽  
Charles DeBattista ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Drug Interactions ◽  
Active Treatment ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Symptom Improvement ◽  
Scale Analysis ◽  
Mokken Scale Analysis ◽  
Hamilton Depression Rating Scale ◽  
Randomized Controlled

Abstract Background Previous research suggests that the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D17) is less sensitive in detecting differences between active treatment and placebo for major depressive disorder (MDD) than is the HAM-D6 scale, which focuses on six core depression symptoms. Whether HAM-D6 shows greater sensitivity when comparing two active MDD treatment arms is unknown. Methods This post hoc analysis used data from the intent-to-treat (ITT) cohort (N = 1541) of the Genomics Used to Improve DEpression Decisions (GUIDED) trial, a rater- and patient-blinded randomized controlled trial. GUIDED compared combinatorial pharmacogenomics-guided care with treatment as usual (TAU) in patients with MDD. Percent of symptom improvement, response rate and remission rate from baseline to week 8 were evaluated using both scales. Analyses were performed for the full cohort and for the subset of patients who at baseline were taking medications predicted by the test to have moderate or significant gene-drug interactions. A Mokken scale analysis was conducted to compare the homogeneity of HAM-D17 with that of HAM-D6. Results At week 8, the guided-care arm demonstrated statistically significant benefit over TAU when the HAM-D6 (∆ = 4.4%, p = 0.023) was used as the continuous measure of symptom improvement, but not when using the HAM-D17 (∆ = 3.2%, p = 0.069). Response rates increased significantly for guided-care compared with TAU when evaluated using both HAM-D6 (∆ = 7.0%, p = 0.004) and HAM-D17 (∆ = 6.3%, p = 0.007). Remission rates also were significantly greater for guided-care versus TAU using both measures (HAM-D6 ∆ = 4.6%, p = 0.031; HAM-D17 ∆ = 5.5%, p = 0.005). Patients in the guided-care arm who at baseline were taking medications predicted to have gene-drug interactions showed further increased benefit over TAU at week 8 for symptom improvement (∆ = 7.3%, p = 0.004) response (∆ = 10.0%, p = 0.001) and remission (∆ = 7.9%, p = 0.005) using HAM-D6. All outcomes showed continued improvement through week 24. Mokken scale analysis demonstrated the homogeneity and unidimensionality of HAM-D6, but not of HAM-D17, across treatment arms. Conclusions The HAM-D6 scale identified a statistically significant difference in symptom improvement between combinatorial pharmacogenomics-guided care and TAU, whereas the HAM-D17 did not. The demonstrated utility of pharmacogenomics-guided treatment over TAU as detected by the HAM-D6 highlights its value for future biomarker-guided trials comparing active treatment arms. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02109939. Registered 10 April 2014.

Improving measurement properties of the Patient Health Questionnaire–9 with rating scale analysis.

2009 ◽  
Vol 54 (2) ◽  
pp. 198-203 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ryan T. Williams ◽  
◽  
Allen W. Heinemann ◽  
Rita K. Bode ◽  
Catherine S. Wilson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rating Scale ◽  
Patient Health Questionnaire ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Scale Analysis ◽  
Health Questionnaire ◽  
Patient Health

Rating Scale Analysis of the Neurobehavioral Cognitive Status Examination

2000 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 683-695 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas A. Doninger ◽  
Rita K. Bode ◽  
Allen W. Heinemann ◽  
Christa Ambrose
Keyword(s):  
Rating Scale ◽  
Cognitive Status ◽  
Scale Analysis ◽  
Neurobehavioral Cognitive Status Examination

scholarly journals Rating disease progression of Friedreich’s ataxia by the International Cooperative Ataxia Rating Scale: analysis of a 603-patient database

Brain ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 136 (1) ◽  
pp. 259-268 ◽  
Author(s):  
Günther Metz ◽  
Nicholas Coppard ◽  
Jonathon M. Cooper ◽  
Martin B. Delatycki ◽  
Alexandra Dürr ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Disease Progression ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Friedreich’S Ataxia ◽  
Friedreich's Ataxia ◽  
Scale Analysis ◽  
Patient Database

scholarly journals Understanding Variance in Pilot Performance Ratings

2013 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 53-62 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy J. Mavin ◽  
Wolff-Michael Roth ◽  
Sidney Dekker
Keyword(s):  
Rating Scale ◽  
Performance Ratings ◽  
Scale Analysis ◽  
Rate Performance ◽  
Performance Study ◽  
Pilot Performance ◽  
Airline Pilots ◽  
Think Aloud Protocol ◽  
Point Rating Scale ◽  
Flight Deck

Two studies were designed to investigate how pilots of different rank evaluate flight-deck performance. In each study, the pilots were asked to assess sets of three different videotaped scenarios featuring pilots in a simulator exhibiting poor, average, and good performance. Study 1, which included 92 airline pilots of differing rank, was aimed at comparing how individuals rate performance. The subjects used a standardized assessment form, which included six criteria, each having a 5-point rating scale. Analysis of the first study revealed that there was considerable variance in the performance ratings between flight examiners, captains, and first officers. The second study was designed to better understand the variance. Eighteen pilots (six flight examiners, six captains, and six first officers) working in pairs evaluated performances, in a modified think-aloud protocol. The results showed that there were good reasons for the observed variances. The results are discussed in relation to inter-rater reliability.

scholarly journals Validasi skala penilaian instrumen perencanaan karier menggunakan Andrich Threshold

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 105-117
Author(s):  
Stefanus Soejanto Sandjaja ◽  
Yuda Syahputra ◽  
Lira Erwinda
Keyword(s):  
Rasch Model ◽  
Random Sampling ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Career Planning ◽  
Likert Scale ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Scale Analysis ◽  
Threshold Analysis ◽  
Inventory Data ◽  
The Rasch Model

AbstractSuccess in a career is synonymous with the welfare of an individual's life, which needs further handling from the counselor. In determining and preparing for a future career, counselors should use a valid and reliable inventory. However, inventory that is considered valid and reliable by the counselor still raises problems in administration, namely students are confused in setting the response point in the inventory. The purpose of this study is to find a clear and unambiguous rating scale to make it easier for students to set a response point in their inventory. The research sample uses area random sampling consisting of six groups of test subjects, namely: 1, n = 75; 2, n = 61; 3, n = 47; 4, n = 146; 5, n = 85; and 6, n = 63. Data in this study were 5-point Likert scale political data collected using career planning inventory. The research data were analyzed using the Rasch model by testing the rating scale analysis through Threshold analysis between ratings. The results showed the rating scale in the Threshold analysis, the rating scale changed to a four-point Likert scale with a choice of very inappropriate, not appropriate, appropriate, and very appropriate.Keywords: Career Planning; Likert Scale; Ratting Scale; Threshold AbstrakSukses dalam karier identik dengan kesejahteraan hidup individu, yang perlu penanganan lebih lanjut dari konselor. Dalam menentukan dan mempersiapkan karier dimasa depan, konselor mestinya menggunakan inventori yang valid dan reliabel. Namun, inventori yang dianggap valid dan reliabel oleh konselor masih memunculkan permasalahan dalam pengadministrasian, yaitu siswa bingung dalam menetapkan rating scale pada inventori. Tujuan penelitian ini adalah menemukan skala penilaian yang jelas dan tidak ambigu untuk memudahkan siswa menetapkan rating scale pada inventori. Sampel penelitian menggunakan area random samplingyang terdiri dari enam kelompok subjek tes, yaitu: 1, n = 75; 2, n = 61; 3, n = 47; 4, n = 146; 5, n = 85; dan 6, n = 63. Data dalam penelitian ini berupa data politomi 5-point Likert scale yang dikumpulkan menggunakan career planning inventory. Data penelitian dianalisis menggunakan model Rasch dengan menguji rating scale analysis melalui analisis Threshold antar rating. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan rating scale pada analisis Threshold, rating scale berubah menjadi empat point Likert scale dengan pilihan sangat tidak sesuai, kurang sesuai, sesuai, dan sangat sesuai. Kata kunci: Perencanaan Karier; Ratting Scale; Skala Likert; Threshold

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document