MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410698289 · doi:10.1007/s11205-025-03613-x

Enhancing the Precision of the Revised Life Orientation Test (LOT-R) across Germany, Ghana, India, and New Zealand Using Rasch Methodology

2025· article· en· W4410698289 on OpenAlexaff
Peter Adu, Tosin Popoola, Emerson Bartholomew, Naved Iqbal, Oleg N. Medvedev, Colin R Simpson

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial Indicators Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicOptimism, Hope, and Well-being
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersVictoria University of Wellington
KeywordsRasch modelQuality of Life ResearchHuman geographyPolytomous Rasch modelTest (biology)Public healthOrientation (vector space)PsychometricsGeographyPsychologyItem response theorySociologySocial scienceMedicineMathematicsDevelopmental psychologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Accurately measuring life orientation (or continuum from optimism to pessimism) is essential for research focused on enhancing health and well-being. The psychometric statistics of the Revised Life Orientation Test (LOT-R) has been examined using Classical Test Theory (CTT). This method has been criticized for relying on the imprecise ordinal scores. We have employed the advance Rasch methodology to examine the psychometric statistics of the Revised Life LOT-R within a community sample from Ghana, Germany, India, and New Zealand. Utilizing the Partial Credit Rasch model, we analyzed responses from a randomly selected sample of 1,000 individuals ( n = 250 from each country) out of the total sample of 1,822 recruited from these countries. Our initial analysis of the LOT-R revealed significant misfit to the unidimensional Rasch model ( χ 2 (24) = 93.38, p < 0.001). The best fit was achieved through the advanced modification process of testlet creation, as evidenced by no significant deviations from the model expectations ( χ 2 (27) = 10.85, p < 0.99). The optimal three testlet model demonstrated strict unidimensionality, good reliability (Person Separation Index = 0.73), monotonous pattern of item thresholds, and adequate sample targeting ( M = 0.20; SD = 0.72). The LOT-R demonstrated internal structural validity, as well as convergent and external validity reflected by expected correlations with measures of compassion towards others, self-compassion, positive affect, distress and negative affect. The LOT-R further showed invariance across sociodemographic factors, and the optimal parameters guided the creation of an algorithm for transforming ordinal to interval data, enhancing precision of the instrument. Our study supports the LOT-R's reliability and validity, improving its precision for investigating dispositional optimism. The study provides an ordinal-to-interval conversion table presented in the paper that can be used to enhance measurement accuracy.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.508
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.491
Teacher spread0.366 · 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial Indicators ResearchSame topicOptimism, Hope, and Well-beingFrench-language works237,207