Guyin Zhang, Amanda J Fairchild, Bo Zhang, Dingjing Shi, Dexin Shi
{"title":"比较临床评估中的Likert和Slider反应格式:使用ces - d8测量抑郁症状的证据","authors":"Guyin Zhang, Amanda J Fairchild, Bo Zhang, Dingjing Shi, Dexin Shi","doi":"10.1177/10731911251329977","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study compared various response formats in fitting confirmatory factor analysis models. Participants responded to the eight-item center for epidemiologic studies depression scale across five different response formats in a within-subjects experimental design: the Likert-type scale, three types of slider response formats, and a number-entry response format. We compared the different response formats based on item-level scores, factor structure and psychometric properties of the scale, mean comparisons across groups, and individuals' sum scores. Similar results were observed across the response formats with respect to factor structure, measurement invariance, reliability, and validity of test scores. However, inconsistent results were found regarding group mean comparisons across groups. Individuals' item scores and sum scores also varied across different response formats, as did participants' subjective evaluations of response formats in terms of perceived accuracy, enjoyment, difficulty, and mental exhaustion. Based on study findings, we provide recommendations and discuss implications for researchers designing and conducting clinical assessments.</p>","PeriodicalId":8577,"journal":{"name":"Assessment","volume":" ","pages":"10731911251329977"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing Likert and Slider Response Formats in Clinical Assessment: Evidence From Measuring Depression Symptoms Using CES-D 8.\",\"authors\":\"Guyin Zhang, Amanda J Fairchild, Bo Zhang, Dingjing Shi, Dexin Shi\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10731911251329977\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This study compared various response formats in fitting confirmatory factor analysis models. Participants responded to the eight-item center for epidemiologic studies depression scale across five different response formats in a within-subjects experimental design: the Likert-type scale, three types of slider response formats, and a number-entry response format. We compared the different response formats based on item-level scores, factor structure and psychometric properties of the scale, mean comparisons across groups, and individuals' sum scores. Similar results were observed across the response formats with respect to factor structure, measurement invariance, reliability, and validity of test scores. However, inconsistent results were found regarding group mean comparisons across groups. Individuals' item scores and sum scores also varied across different response formats, as did participants' subjective evaluations of response formats in terms of perceived accuracy, enjoyment, difficulty, and mental exhaustion. Based on study findings, we provide recommendations and discuss implications for researchers designing and conducting clinical assessments.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8577,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Assessment\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"10731911251329977\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Assessment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10731911251329977\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Assessment","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10731911251329977","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparing Likert and Slider Response Formats in Clinical Assessment: Evidence From Measuring Depression Symptoms Using CES-D 8.
This study compared various response formats in fitting confirmatory factor analysis models. Participants responded to the eight-item center for epidemiologic studies depression scale across five different response formats in a within-subjects experimental design: the Likert-type scale, three types of slider response formats, and a number-entry response format. We compared the different response formats based on item-level scores, factor structure and psychometric properties of the scale, mean comparisons across groups, and individuals' sum scores. Similar results were observed across the response formats with respect to factor structure, measurement invariance, reliability, and validity of test scores. However, inconsistent results were found regarding group mean comparisons across groups. Individuals' item scores and sum scores also varied across different response formats, as did participants' subjective evaluations of response formats in terms of perceived accuracy, enjoyment, difficulty, and mental exhaustion. Based on study findings, we provide recommendations and discuss implications for researchers designing and conducting clinical assessments.
期刊介绍:
Assessment publishes articles in the domain of applied clinical assessment. The emphasis of this journal is on publication of information of relevance to the use of assessment measures, including test development, validation, and interpretation practices. The scope of the journal includes research that can inform assessment practices in mental health, forensic, medical, and other applied settings. Papers that focus on the assessment of cognitive and neuropsychological functioning, personality, and psychopathology are invited. Most papers published in Assessment report the results of original empirical research, however integrative review articles and scholarly case studies will also be considered.