The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
What Do You Think You Are Measuring? A Mixed-Methods Procedure for Assessing the Content Validity of Test Items and Theory-Based Scaling
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, February 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00126 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ingrid Koller, Michael R. Levenson, Judith Glück |
| Abstract |
The valid measurement of latent constructs is crucial for psychological research. Here, we present a mixed-methods procedure for improving the precision of construct definitions, determining the content validity of items, evaluating the representativeness of items for the target construct, generating test items, and analyzing items on a theoretical basis. To illustrate the mixed-methods content-scaling-structure (CSS) procedure, we analyze the Adult Self-Transcendence Inventory, a self-report measure of wisdom (ASTI, Levenson et al., 2005). A content-validity analysis of the ASTI items was used as the basis of psychometric analyses using multidimensional item response models (N = 1215). We found that the new procedure produced important suggestions concerning five subdimensions of the ASTI that were not identifiable using exploratory methods. The study shows that the application of the suggested procedure leads to a deeper understanding of latent constructs. It also demonstrates the advantages of theory-based item analysis. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 263 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Macao | 1 | <1% |
| Ireland | 1 | <1% |
| Argentina | 1 | <1% |
| Austria | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 259 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 30 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 30 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 24 | 9% |
| Researcher | 19 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 18 | 7% |
| Other | 44 | 17% |
| Unknown | 98 | 37% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 40 | 15% |
| Social Sciences | 28 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 19 | 7% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 19 | 7% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 14 | 5% |
| Other | 41 | 16% |
| Unknown | 102 | 39% |
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 05 February 2017.
All research outputs
#20,715,632
of 25,446,666 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#25,425
of 34,500 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#251,779
of 324,099 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#404
of 488 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,446,666 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 34,500 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.3. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 324,099 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 488 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.