心理测试的无偏置信区间:基于回归的真实得分方法与量表校正。

IF 3.4 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Stefan C Schmukle
{"title":"心理测试的无偏置信区间:基于回归的真实得分方法与量表校正。","authors":"Stefan C Schmukle","doi":"10.1177/10731911251362532","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Two different approaches for calculating confidence intervals (CIs) for individual scores in psychological testing practice have been discussed in the literature within the framework of classical test theory. The traditional approach (CI: observed score ± <i>z</i> · standard error of measurement) has been criticized because it does not consider the phenomenon that, with imperfect measurement, true scores will be closer to the population average than the observed scores (regression to the mean). The regression approach (CI: regression-based true score estimate ± <i>z</i> · standard error of the estimate) takes this effect into account, but has the disadvantage that it leads to confidence intervals that are on a different scale than the observed scores. The different scaling occurs because true scores have a smaller standard deviation than observed scores, and the extent of this shrinkage depends on the reliability of the test. Here, I suggest a scale correction for the regression-based true score estimate to preserve the original scaling. Simulations indicate that this approach has the desired properties and outperforms the two existing approaches. The regression approach with scale correction is therefore recommended for calculating confidence intervals for individual scores in psychological testing practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":8577,"journal":{"name":"Assessment","volume":" ","pages":"10731911251362532"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Unbiased Confidence Intervals for Psychological Testing: The Regression-Based True Score Approach With Scale Correction.\",\"authors\":\"Stefan C Schmukle\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10731911251362532\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Two different approaches for calculating confidence intervals (CIs) for individual scores in psychological testing practice have been discussed in the literature within the framework of classical test theory. The traditional approach (CI: observed score ± <i>z</i> · standard error of measurement) has been criticized because it does not consider the phenomenon that, with imperfect measurement, true scores will be closer to the population average than the observed scores (regression to the mean). The regression approach (CI: regression-based true score estimate ± <i>z</i> · standard error of the estimate) takes this effect into account, but has the disadvantage that it leads to confidence intervals that are on a different scale than the observed scores. The different scaling occurs because true scores have a smaller standard deviation than observed scores, and the extent of this shrinkage depends on the reliability of the test. Here, I suggest a scale correction for the regression-based true score estimate to preserve the original scaling. Simulations indicate that this approach has the desired properties and outperforms the two existing approaches. The regression approach with scale correction is therefore recommended for calculating confidence intervals for individual scores in psychological testing practice.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8577,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Assessment\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"10731911251362532\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Assessment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10731911251362532\",\"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/10.1177/10731911251362532","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在经典测试理论的框架内,文献讨论了心理测试实践中计算个体分数置信区间的两种不同方法。传统的方法(CI:观察得分±z·测量标准误差)一直受到批评,因为它没有考虑到在测量不完善的情况下,真实得分将比观察得分更接近总体平均值(回归均值)的现象。回归方法(CI:基于回归的真实分数估计值±z·估计值的标准误差)考虑了这种影响,但其缺点是导致置信区间与观察到的分数在不同的尺度上。发生不同的缩放是因为真实分数的标准偏差小于观察分数,并且这种收缩的程度取决于测试的可靠性。在这里,我建议对基于回归的真实分数估计进行尺度校正,以保留原始的尺度。仿真结果表明,该方法具有理想的性能,并且优于现有的两种方法。因此,在心理测试实践中,建议采用带刻度校正的回归方法来计算个体得分的置信区间。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Unbiased Confidence Intervals for Psychological Testing: The Regression-Based True Score Approach With Scale Correction.

Two different approaches for calculating confidence intervals (CIs) for individual scores in psychological testing practice have been discussed in the literature within the framework of classical test theory. The traditional approach (CI: observed score ± z · standard error of measurement) has been criticized because it does not consider the phenomenon that, with imperfect measurement, true scores will be closer to the population average than the observed scores (regression to the mean). The regression approach (CI: regression-based true score estimate ± z · standard error of the estimate) takes this effect into account, but has the disadvantage that it leads to confidence intervals that are on a different scale than the observed scores. The different scaling occurs because true scores have a smaller standard deviation than observed scores, and the extent of this shrinkage depends on the reliability of the test. Here, I suggest a scale correction for the regression-based true score estimate to preserve the original scaling. Simulations indicate that this approach has the desired properties and outperforms the two existing approaches. The regression approach with scale correction is therefore recommended for calculating confidence intervals for individual scores in psychological testing practice.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Assessment
Assessment PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
8.90
自引率
2.60%
发文量
86
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.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信