MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2958621914 · doi:10.25035/pad.2019.01.003

Criterion-related Validity of Forced-Choice Personality Measures: A Cautionary Note Regarding Thurstonian IRT versus Classical Test Theory Scoring

2019· article· en· W2958621914 on OpenAlexaff
Peter A. Fisher, Chet Robie, Neil Douglas Christiansen, Andrew B. Speer, Leann Schneider

Bibliographic record

VenuePersonnel Assessment and Decisions · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPersonality Traits and Psychology
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTwo-alternative forced choicePsychologyItem response theoryPersonalityCriterion validityTest (biology)Social psychologyStatisticsPersonality testEconometricsPsychometricsMathematicsTest validityCognitive psychologyConstruct validityClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined criterion-related validity for job-related composites of forced-choice personality scores against job performance using both Thurstonian Item Response Theory (TIRT) and Classical Test Theory (CTT) scoring methods. Correlations were computed across 11 different samples that differed in job or role within a job. A meta-analysis of the correlations (k = 11 and N = 613) found a higher average corrected correlation for CTT (mean ρ = .38) than for TIRT (mean ρ = .00). Implications and directions for future research are discussed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.231
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.366
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.769
Threshold uncertainty score0.948

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2310.366
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.118
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.297 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designSimulation or modeling
DomainMethods
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations30
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePersonnel Assessment and DecisionsSame topicPersonality Traits and PsychologyFrench-language works237,207