The Role of Response Style Adjustments in Cross-Country Comparisons—A Case Study Using Data from the PISA 2015 Questionnaire

IF 2.7 4区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Esther Ulitzsch, Oliver Lüdtke, Alexander Robitzsch
{"title":"The Role of Response Style Adjustments in Cross-Country Comparisons—A Case Study Using Data from the PISA 2015 Questionnaire","authors":"Esther Ulitzsch,&nbsp;Oliver Lüdtke,&nbsp;Alexander Robitzsch","doi":"10.1111/emip.12552","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Country differences in response styles (RS) may jeopardize cross-country comparability of Likert-type scales. When adjusting for rather than investigating RS is the primary goal, it seems advantageous to impose minimal assumptions on RS structures and leverage information from multiple scales for RS measurement. Using PISA 2015 background questionnaire data, we investigate such an adjustment procedure and explore its impact on cross-country comparisons in contrast to customary analyses and RS adjustments that (a) leave RS unconsidered, (b) incorporate stronger assumptions on RS structure, and/or (c) only use some selected scales for RS measurement. Our findings suggest that not only the decision as to whether to adjust for RS but also how to adjust may heavily impact cross-country comparisons. This concerns both the assumptions on RS structures and the scales employed for RS measurement. Implications for RS adjustments in cross-country comparisons are derived, strongly advocating for taking model uncertainty into account.</p>","PeriodicalId":47345,"journal":{"name":"Educational Measurement-Issues and Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/emip.12552","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Measurement-Issues and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/emip.12552","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Country differences in response styles (RS) may jeopardize cross-country comparability of Likert-type scales. When adjusting for rather than investigating RS is the primary goal, it seems advantageous to impose minimal assumptions on RS structures and leverage information from multiple scales for RS measurement. Using PISA 2015 background questionnaire data, we investigate such an adjustment procedure and explore its impact on cross-country comparisons in contrast to customary analyses and RS adjustments that (a) leave RS unconsidered, (b) incorporate stronger assumptions on RS structure, and/or (c) only use some selected scales for RS measurement. Our findings suggest that not only the decision as to whether to adjust for RS but also how to adjust may heavily impact cross-country comparisons. This concerns both the assumptions on RS structures and the scales employed for RS measurement. Implications for RS adjustments in cross-country comparisons are derived, strongly advocating for taking model uncertainty into account.

Abstract Image

反应风格调整在跨国比较中的作用——基于2015年PISA问卷数据的案例研究
国家间反应风格的差异可能会危及李克特量表的跨国可比性。当调整而不是调查RS是主要目标时,对RS结构施加最小假设并利用来自多个尺度的RS测量信息似乎是有利的。使用PISA 2015背景问卷数据,我们调查了这种调整程序,并探讨了它对跨国比较的影响,而不是习惯分析和RS调整(a)不考虑RS, (b)对RS结构纳入更强的假设,和/或(c)仅使用一些选定的量表进行RS测量。我们的研究结果表明,不仅决定是否调整RS,而且如何调整也可能严重影响跨国比较。这既涉及RS结构的假设,也涉及RS测量所采用的尺度。本文推导了跨国比较对RS调整的影响,强烈主张考虑模式的不确定性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
15.00%
发文量
47
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信