Multidimensional Forced-choice Research Articles

A Framework for Detecting Both Main Effect and Interactive DIF in Multidimensional Forced-Choice Assessments

In recent decades, multidimensional forced-choice (MFC) tests have gained widespread popularity in organizational settings due to their effectiveness in reducing response biases. Detecting differential item functioning (DIF) is crucial in developing MFC tests, as it relates to test fairness and validity. However, existing methods appear insufficient for detecting DIF induced by the interaction between multiple covariates. Furthermore, for multi-category, ordered or continuous covariates, existing approaches often dichotomize them using a-priori cutoffs, commonly using the median of the covariates. This may lead to information loss and reduced power in detecting MFC DIF. To address these limitations, we propose a method to identify both main effect DIF and interactive DIF. This method can automatically search for the optimal cutoffs for ordered or continuous covariates without pre-defined cutoffs. We introduce the rationale behind the proposed method and evaluate its performance through three Monte Carlo simulation studies. Results demonstrate that the proposed method effectively identifies various DIF forms in MFC tests, thereby increasing detection power. Finally, we provide an empirical application to illustrate the practical applicability of the proposed method.

Linking Methods for Multidimensional Forced Choice Tests Using the Multi-Unidimensional Pairwise Preference Model.

Applications of multidimensional forced choice (MFC) testing have increased considerably over the last 20years. Yet there has been little, if any, research on methods for linking the parameter estimates from different samples. This research addressed that important need by extending four widely used methods for unidimensional linking and comparing the efficacy of new estimation algorithms for MFC linking coefficients based on the Multi-Unidimensional Pairwise Preference model (MUPP). More specifically, we compared the efficacy of multidimensional test characteristic curve (TCC), item characteristic curve (ICC; Haebara, 1980), mean/mean (M/M), and mean/sigma (M/S) methods in a Monte Carlo study that also manipulated test length, test dimensionality, sample size, percentage of anchor items, and linking scenarios. Results indicated that the ICC method outperformed the M/M method, which was better than the M/S method, with the TCC method being the least effective. However, as the number of items "per dimension" and the percentage of anchor items increased, the differences between the ICC, M/M, and M/S methods decreased. Study implications and practical recommendations for MUPP linking, as well as limitations, are discussed.

Examining gender differences in the use of multidimensional forced‐choice measures of personality in terms of test‐taker reactions and test fairness

AbstractHuman resource (HR) practices have been focused on using assessments that are robust to faking and response biases associated with Likert‐type scales. As an alternative, multidimensional forced‐choice (MFC) measures have recently shown advances in reducing faking and response biases while retaining similar levels of validity to Likert‐type measures. Although research evidence supports the effectiveness of MFC measures, fairness issues resulting from gender biases in the use of MFC measures have not yet been investigated in the literature. Given the importance of gender equity in HR development, it is vital that new assessments improve upon known gender biases in the historical use of Likert‐type measures and do not lead to gender discrimination in HR practices. In this vein, our investigation focuses specifically on potential gender biases in the use of MFC measures for HR development. Specifically, our study examines differential test‐taker reactions and differential prediction of self‐assessed leadership ability between genders when using the MFC personality measure. In an experimental study with college students, we found no evidence of gender differences in test‐taker reactions to MFC measures. In a second cross‐sectional study with full‐time employees, we found evidence of intercept differences, such that females were frequently underpredicted when using MFC personality measures to predict self‐assessed leadership ability. Moreover, the pattern of differential prediction using MFC measures was similar to that of Likert‐type measures. Implications for MFC personality measures in applied practice are discussed.

Detecting Careless Responding in Multidimensional Forced-Choice Questionnaires

The multidimensional forced-choice (MFC) format is an alternative to rating scales in which participants rank items according to how well the items describe them. Currently, little is known about how to detect careless responding in MFC data. The aim of this study was to adapt a number of indices used for rating scales to the MFC format and additionally develop several new indices that are unique to the MFC format. We applied these indices to a data set from an online survey ( N = 1,169) that included a series of personality questionnaires in the MFC format. The correlations among the careless responding indices were somewhat lower than those published for rating scales. Results from a latent profile analysis suggested that the majority of the sample (about 76–84%) did not respond carelessly, although the ones who did were characterized by different levels of careless responding. In a simulation study, we simulated different careless responding patterns and varied the overall proportion of carelessness in the samples. With one exception, the indices worked as intended conceptually. Taken together, the results suggest that careless responding also plays an important role in the MFC format. Recommendations on how it can be addressed are discussed.

Linear Factor Analytic Thurstonian Forced-Choice Models: Current Status and Issues

Thurstonian forced-choice modeling is considered to be a powerful new tool to estimate item and person parameters while simultaneously testing the model fit. This assessment approach is associated with the aim of reducing faking and other response tendencies that plague traditional self-report trait assessments. As a result of major recent methodological developments, the estimation of normative trait scores has become possible in addition to the computation of only ipsative scores. This opened up the important possibility of comparisons between individuals with forced-choice assessment procedures. With item response theory (IRT) methods, a multidimensional forced-choice (MFC) format has also been proposed to estimate individual scores. Customarily, items to assess different traits are presented in blocks, often triplets, in applications of the MFC, which is an efficient form of item presentation but also a simplification of the original models. The present study provides a comprehensive review of the present status of Thurstonian forced-choice models and their variants. Critical features of the current models, especially the block models, are identified and discussed. It is concluded that MFC modeling with item blocks is highly problematic and yields biased results. In particular, the often-recommended presentation of blocks with items that are keyed in different directions of a trait proves to be counterproductive considering the goal to reduce response tendencies. The consequences and implications of the highlighted issues are further discussed.

Estimating and Using Block Information in the Thurstonian IRT Model

Multidimensional forced-choice (MFC) tests are increasing in popularity but their construction is complex. The Thurstonian item response model (Thurstonian IRT model) is most often used to score MFC tests that contain dominance items. Currently, in a frequentist framework, information about the latent traits in the Thurstonian IRT model is computed for binary outcomes of pairwise comparisons, but this approach neglects stochastic dependencies. In this manuscript, it is shown how to estimate Fisher information on the block level. A simulation study showed that the observed and expected standard errors based on the block information were similarly accurate. When local dependencies for block sizes >,2 were neglected, the standard errors were underestimated, except with the maximum a posteriori estimator. It is shown how the multidimensional block information can be summarized for test construction. A simulation study and an empirical application showed small differences between the block information summaries depending on the outcome considered. Thus, block information can aid the construction of reliable MFC tests.

“Use the Force!” Adaptation of Response Formats

Abstract. The present paper features the adaptation of an existing Big Five questionnaire with a rating scale (RS) response format into a measure using a multidimensional forced choice (MFC) response format. Rating scale response formats have been criticized for their proneness to intentional and unintentional response distortions. Multidimensional forced choice response formats were suggested as a solution to mitigate several types of response sets and response styles by design. The Big Five Inventory of Personality in Occupational Situations (B5PS) is a situation-based questionnaire designed for personnel selection and development purposes which would benefit from fake-proof response formats. MFC response formats require special effort during test construction and calibration which will be laid out here. Changing the response format has severe consequences on item design and scoring. An inherent issue with MFC formats derives from their inability to yield interpersonal comparative results from standard (sum) scoring. This issue can be solved with item response theory (IRT)-based calibration during test construction. The Thurstonian IRT approach (TIRT) was developed by Brown and Maydeu-Olivares (2011) , and aspects of MFC item design and TIRT calibrations are explored in this paper. Evidence on structural and construct validity are presented alongside recommendations on the test development processes. The results support the feasibility of the concept of MFC test construction with TIRT calibration in a contextualized and situation-based item format.

A dual process item response theory model for polytomous multidimensional forced-choice items.

The use of multidimensional forced-choice (MFC) items to assess non-cognitive traits such as personality, interests and values in psychological tests has a long history, because MFC items show strengths in preventing response bias. Recently, there has been a surge of interest in developing item response theory (IRT) models for MFC items. However, nearly all of the existing IRT models have been developed for MFC items with binary scores. Real tests use MFC items with more than two categories; such items are more informative than their binary counterparts. This study developed a new IRT model for polytomous MFC items based on the cognitive model of choice, which describes the cognitive processes underlying humans' preferential choice behaviours. The new model is unique in its ability to account for the ipsative nature of polytomous MFC items, to assess individual psychological differentiation in interests, values and emotions, and to compare the differentiation levels of latent traits between individuals. Simulation studies were conducted to examine the parameter recovery of the new model with existing computer programs. The results showed that both statement parameters and person parameters were well recovered when the sample size was sufficient. The more complete the linking of the statements was, the more accurate the parameter estimation was. This paper provides an empirical example of a career interest test using four-category MFC items. Although some aspects of the model (e.g., the nature of the person parameters) require additional validation, our approach appears promising.

Item selection methods in multidimensional computerized adaptive testing for forced-choice items using Thurstonian IRT model.

Multidimensional computerized adaptive testing for forced-choice items (MFC-CAT) combines the benefits of multidimensional forced-choice (MFC) items and computerized adaptive testing (CAT) in that it eliminates response biases and reduces administration time. Previous studies that explored designs of MFC-CAT only discussed item selection methods based on the Fisher information (FI), which is known to perform unstably at early stages of CAT. This study proposes a set of new item selection methods based on the KL information for MFC-CAT (namely MFC-KI, MFC-KB, and MFC-KLP) based on the Thurstonian IRT (TIRT) model. Three simulation studies, including one based on real data, were conducted to compare the performance of the proposed KL-based item selection methods against the existing FI-based methods in three- and five-dimensional MFC-CAT scenarios with various test lengths and inter-trait correlations. Results demonstrate that the proposed KL-based item selection methods are feasible for MFC-CAT and generate acceptable trait estimation accuracy and uniformity of item pool usage. Among the three proposed methods, MFC-KB and MFC-KLP outperformed the existing FI-based item selection methods and resulted in the most accurate trait estimation and relatively even utilization of the item pool.

How do applicants fake? A response process model of faking on multidimensional forced‐choice personality assessments

AbstractFaking on personality assessments remains an unsolved issue, raising major concerns regarding their validity and fairness. Although there is a large body of quantitative research investigating the response process of faking on personality assessments, for both rating scales (RS) and multidimensional forced choice (MFC), only a few studies have yet qualitatively investigated the faking cognitions when responding to MFC in a high‐stakes context (e.g., Sass et al., 2020). Yet, it could be argued that only when we have a process model that adequately describes the response decisions in high stakes, can we begin to extract valid and useful information from assessments. Thus, this qualitative study investigated the faking cognitions when responding to MFC personality assessment in a high‐stakes context. Through cognitive interviews with N = 32 participants, we explored and identified factors influencing the test‐takers' decisions regarding specific items and blocks, and factors influencing the willingness to engage in faking in general. Based on these findings, we propose a new response process model of faking forced‐choice items, the Activate‐Rank‐Edit‐Submit (A‐R‐E‐S) model. We also make four recommendations for practice of high‐stakes assessments using MFC.

Comparison of parameter estimation approaches for multi-unidimensional pairwise preference tests.

Multidimensional forced-choice (MFC) testing has been proposed as a way of reducing response biases in noncognitive measurement. Although early item response theory (IRT) research focused on illustrating that person parameter estimates with normative properties could be obtained using various MFC models and formats, more recent attention has been devoted to exploring the processes involved in test construction and how that influences MFC scores. This research compared two approaches for estimating multi-unidimensional pairwise preference model (MUPP; Stark et al., 2005) parameters based on the generalized graded unfolding model (GGUM; Roberts et al., 2000). More specifically, we compared the efficacy of statement and person parameter estimation based on a "two-step" process, developed by Stark et al. (2005), with a more recently developed "direct" estimation approach (Lee et al., 2019) in a Monte Carlo study that also manipulated test length, test dimensionality, sample size, and the correlations between generating person parameters for each dimension. Results indicated that the two approaches had similar scoring accuracy, although the two-step approach had better statement parameter recovery than the direct approach. Limitations, implications for MFC test construction and scoring, and recommendations for future MFC research and practice are discussed.

IRT-based scoring methods for multidimensional forced choice tests

IRT-based scoring methods for multidimensional forced choice tests

Investigating the impact of negatively keyed statements on multidimensional forced-choice personality measures: A comparison of partially ipsative and IRT scoring methods

Multidimensional forced choice (MFC) personality tests have recently come to light as important personnel assessments in industrial and organizational psychology. For developing MFC measures, researchers have recommended including heteropolar blocks (i.e., both negatively and positively keyed statements are mixed within a block) to improve the scoring estimation accuracy. However, very few studies have explored the impact of heteropolar blocks on psychometric properties within the MFC context. In this study, we 1) explored how heteropolar blocks influence reliability and validity of MFC tests through Monte Carlo simulations and 2) empirically demonstrated how MFC test designs associated with heteropolar blocks affect criterion-related validity using real examinees. Result shows the Thurstonian Item Response Theory (TIRT) scoring method and higher intrablock discrimination yielded better reliability and criterion-related validity. In addition, result suggests that one can achieve sufficient reliability (i.e., 0.87–0.90 on average) and validity (i.e., 0.40–0.45 on average) by using highly discriminating 20–40% heteropolar blocks with TIRT model. Our empirical demonstration showed that criterion-related validity results can be different depending on the test designs of heteropolar blocks. Practical implications and future research topics are discussed.

Modeling Faking in the Multidimensional Forced-Choice Format: The Faking Mixture Model

The multidimensional forced-choice (MFC) format has been proposed to reduce faking because items within blocks can be matched on desirability. However, the desirability of individual items might not transfer to the item blocks. The aim of this paper is to propose a mixture item response theory model for faking in the MFC format that allows to estimate the fakability of MFC blocks, termed the Faking Mixture model. Given current computing capabilities, within-subject data from both high- and low-stakes contexts are needed to estimate the model. A simulation showed good parameter recovery under various conditions. An empirical validation showed that matching was necessary but not sufficient to create an MFC questionnaire that can reduce faking. The Faking Mixture model can be used to reduce fakability during test construction.

Modeling Multidimensional Forced Choice Measures with the Zinnes and Griggs Pairwise Preference Item Response Theory Model

This research developed a new ideal point-based item response theory (IRT) model for multidimensional forced choice (MFC) measures. We adapted the Zinnes and Griggs (ZG; 1974) IRT model and the multi-unidimensional pairwise preference (MUPP; Stark et al., 2005) model, henceforth referred to as ZG-MUPP. We derived the information function to evaluate the psychometric properties of MFC measures and developed a model parameter estimation algorithm using Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC). To evaluate the efficacy of the proposed model, we conducted a simulation study under various experimental conditions such as sample sizes, number of items, and ranges of discrimination and location parameters. The results showed that the model parameters were accurately estimated when the sample size was as low as 500. The empirical results also showed that the scores from the ZG-MUPP model were comparable to those from the MUPP model and the Thurstonian IRT (TIRT) model. Practical implications and limitations are further discussed.

Investigating the Normativity of Trait Estimates from Multidimensional Forced-Choice Data

The Thurstonian item response model (Thurstonian IRT model) allows deriving normative trait estimates from multidimensional forced-choice (MFC) data. In the MFC format, persons must rank-order items that measure different attributes according to how well the items describe them. This study evaluated the normativity of Thurstonian IRT trait estimates both in a simulation and empirically. The simulation investigated normativity and compared Thurstonian IRT trait estimates to those using classical partially ipsative scoring, from dichotomous true-false (TF) data and rating scale data. The results showed that, with blocks of opposite keyed items, Thurstonian IRT trait estimates were normative in contrast to classical partially ipsative estimates. Unbalanced numbers of items per trait, few opposite keyed items, traits correlated positively or assessing fewer traits did not decrease measurement precision markedly. Measurement precision was lower than that of rating scale data. The empirical study investigated whether relative MFC responses provide a better differentiation of behaviors within persons than absolute TF responses. However, criterion validity was equal and construct validity (with constructs measured by rating scales) lower in MFC. Thus, Thurstonian IRT modeling of MFC data overcomes the drawbacks of classical scoring, but gains in validity may depend on eliminating common method biases from the comparison.

Faking and the Validity of Personality Tests: An Experimental Investigation Using Modern Forced Choice Measures

Despite the established validity of personality measures for personnel selection, their susceptibility to faking has been a persistent concern. However, the lack of studies that combine generalizability with experimental control makes it difficult to determine the effects of applicant faking. This study addressed this deficit in two ways. First, we compared a subtle incentive to fake with the explicit “fake-good” instructions used in most faking experiments. Second, we compared standard Likert scales to multidimensional forced choice (MFC) scales designed to resist deception, including more and less fakable versions of the same MFC inventory. MFC scales substantially reduced motivated score elevation but also appeared to elicit selective faking on work-relevant dimensions. Despite reducing the effectiveness of impression management attempts, MFC scales did not retain more validity than Likert scales when participants faked. However, results suggested that faking artificially bolstered the criterion-related validity of Likert scales while diminishing their construct validity.

A New Investigation of Fake Resistance of a Multidimensional Forced-Choice Measure: An Application of Differential Item/Test Functioning

To address faking issues associated with Likert-type personality measures, multidimensional forced-choice (MFC) measures have recently come to light as important components of personnel assessment systems. Despite various efforts to investigate the fake resistance of MFC measures, previous research has mainly focused on the scale mean differences between honest and faking conditions. Given the recent psychometric advancements in MFC measures (e.g., Brown & Maydeu-Olivares, 2011; Stark et al., 2005; Lee et al., 2019; Joo et al., 2019), there is a need to investigate the fake resistance of MFC measures through a new methodological lens. This research investigates the fake resistance of MFC measures through recently proposed differential item functioning (DIF) and differential test functioning (DTF) methodologies for MFC measures (Lee, Joo, & Stark, 2020). Overall, our results show that MFC measures are more fake resistant than Likert-type measures at the item and test levels. However, MFC measures may still be susceptible to faking if MFC measures include many mixed blocks consisting of positively and negatively keyed statements within a block. It may be necessary for future research to find an optimal strategy to design mixed blocks in the MFC measures to satisfy the goals of validity and scoring accuracy. Practical implications and limitations are discussed in the paper.

Supplemental Material for Does Multidimensional Forced-Choice Prevent Faking? Comparing the Susceptibility of the Multidimensional Forced-Choice Format and the Rating Scale Format to Faking

Supplemental Material for Does Multidimensional Forced-Choice Prevent Faking? Comparing the Susceptibility of the Multidimensional Forced-Choice Format and the Rating Scale Format to Faking

Assessment of Differential Statement Functioning in Ipsative Tests With Multidimensional Forced-Choice Items.

Ipsative tests with multidimensional forced-choice (MFC) items have been widely used to assess career interest, values, and personality to prevent response biases. Recently, there has been a surge of interest in developing item response theory models for MFC items. In reality, a statement in an MFC item may have different utilities for different groups, which is referred to as differential statement functioning (DSF). However, few studies have been investigated methods for detecting DSF owing to the challenges related to the features of ipsative tests. In this study, three methods were adapted for DSF assessment in MFC items: equal-mean-utility (EMU), all-other-statement (AOS), and constant-statement (CS). Simulation studies were conducted to evaluate the recovery of parameters and the performance of the proposed methods. Results showed that statement parameters and DSF parameters were well recovered for all the three methods when the test did not contain any DSF statement. When the test contained one or more DSF statements, only the CS method yielded accurate estimates. With respect to DSF assessment, both the EMU method using the bootstrap standard error and the AOS method performed appropriately so long as the test did not contain any DSF statement. The CS method performed well in cases where one or more DSF-free statements were chosen as an anchor. The longer the anchor statements, the higher the power of DSF detection.