↓ Skip to main content

Chop and Change: A Commentary and Demonstration of Classical vs. Modern Measurement Models for Interpreting Latent-Stability of Occupational-Future Time Perspective

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
18 Mendeley
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.
Title
Chop and Change: A Commentary and Demonstration of Classical vs. Modern Measurement Models for Interpreting Latent-Stability of Occupational-Future Time Perspective
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, June 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01029
Pubmed ID
Authors

Matthew J. Kerry

Abstract

This commentary article was initially motivated by an empirical paper published in the journal of Work, Aging, and Retirement that reported support for stability (non-decreasing) future time perspectives (FTP) over two repeated-measurements. That is, empirical evidence supporting the temporal stability of an adapted measure (occupational-FTP [O-FTP]) serves as guiding framework for demonstrating limitations of classical test theory (CTT) and modern psychometrics' (IRT) enabling extension for stronger substantive inferences from response data. The focal authors' quantitative attention to study design and statistical analysis is commendable. In this commentary, I aim to complement their efforts from a measurement perspective. This is accomplished through four sections. In the first section, I summarize some well-known limitations to CTT measurement models for assessing change. Then, I briefly introduce item response theory (IRT) as an alternative test theory. In the second section, Chop, I review the empirical evidence for FTP and O-FTP's latent-factor structure. Then, I bring evidence from modern psychometric methods to bear on O-FTP, specifically, a model-comparisons approach was adopted for comparing relative fit of 1-factor, 2-factor, and bifactor solutions in cross-sectional data (N = 511). Findings supported retention of the bifactor solution. In the third section, Change, I extend the bifactor model to two-wave FTP data over approximately 2 years (N = 620) as an instructive application for assessing temporal stability. The fourth section concludes with a brief discussion of substantive implications and meaningful interpretation of (O)-FTP scores over time.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 18 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 3 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 17%
Researcher 2 11%
Professor 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 6 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 4 22%
Engineering 3 17%
Psychology 2 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 6%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 5 28%
Attention Score in Context

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 19 June 2018.
All research outputs
#18,633,675
of 23,083,773 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#22,610
of 30,444 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#252,970
of 328,020 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#593
of 697 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,083,773 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,444 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 328,020 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 697 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.