IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/intell/v68y2018icp109-116.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A snapshot of g? Binary and polytomous item-response theory investigations of the last series of the Standard Progressive Matrices (SPM-LS)

Author

Listed:
  • Myszkowski, Nils
  • Storme, Martin

Abstract

Raven’s progressive matrices (Raven, 1941) are extremely popular measures of general mental ability. However, their length may not suit every researcher’s or practitioner’s needs. Short versions of the Advanced version have resulted in problematic factor structures and internal consistencies (Arthur, Tubre, Paul, & Sanchez-Ku, 1999; Bors & Stokes, 1998): Is the last series of the Standard Progressive Matrices a more viable option? The aim of this research was to investigate the structural validity and internal reliability of the last series of the SPM (SPM-LS) as a standalone measure. The SPM-LS binary (correct/incorrect) responses of 499 undergraduate students were investigated through unidimensional Item-Response Theory (IRT) 1–4 Parameter Logistic (PL) models. They were satisfactorily modeled by unidimensional models (CFI3PL = 0.974, TLI3PL = 0.959, RMSEA3PL = 0.059, SRMR3PL = 0.056), offering good empirical reliability (rxx′,3PL = 0.843), and outperforming the short Advanced Progressive Matrices’ previously reported qualities. Full nominal responses – recovering information from the distractor responses – were further examined with recently introduced 2–4 Parameter Logistic Nested (PLN) models (Suh & Bolt, 2010), providing significant reliability gains (Δrxx′ = 0.029, Bootstrapped 95% CI [0.019, 0.036], z = 6.06, p < .001). Uses, limitations, conditional reliability and scoring strategies are further examined and discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Myszkowski, Nils & Storme, Martin, 2018. "A snapshot of g? Binary and polytomous item-response theory investigations of the last series of the Standard Progressive Matrices (SPM-LS)," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 109-116.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:intell:v:68:y:2018:i:c:p:109-116
    DOI: 10.1016/j.intell.2018.03.010
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289617302982
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.intell.2018.03.010?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John Horn, 1965. "A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 30(2), pages 179-185, June.
    2. Youngsuk Suh & Daniel Bolt, 2010. "Nested Logit Models for Multiple-Choice Item Response Data," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 75(3), pages 454-473, September.
    3. R. Darrell Bock, 1972. "Estimating item parameters and latent ability when responses are scored in two or more nominal categories," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 37(1), pages 29-51, March.
    4. Chalmers, R. Philip, 2012. "mirt: A Multidimensional Item Response Theory Package for the R Environment," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 48(i06).
    5. Denny Borsboom, 2006. "The attack of the psychometricians," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 71(3), pages 425-440, September.
    6. William Revelle & Richard Zinbarg, 2009. "Coefficients Alpha, Beta, Omega, and the glb: Comments on Sijtsma," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 74(1), pages 145-154, March.
    7. Rosseel, Yves, 2012. "lavaan: An R Package for Structural Equation Modeling," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 48(i02).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Gignac, Gilles E., 2024. "Rethinking the Dunning-Kruger effect: Negligible influence on a limited segment of the population," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    2. James Joseph Balamuta & Steven Andrew Culpepper, 2022. "Exploratory Restricted Latent Class Models with Monotonicity Requirements under PÒLYA–GAMMA Data Augmentation," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 87(3), pages 903-945, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Piotr Koc, 2021. "Measuring Non-electoral Political Participation: Bi-factor Model as a Tool to Extract Dimensions," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 156(1), pages 271-287, July.
    2. Marius Leckelt & Eunike Wetzel & Tanja M. Gerlach & Robert A. Ackerman & Joshua D. Miller & William J. Chopik & Lars Penke & Katharina Geukes & Albrecht C. P. Küfner & Roos Hutteman & David Richter & , 2016. "Validation of the Narcissistic Admiration and Rivalry Questionnaire Short Scale (NARQ-S) in Convenience and Representative Samples," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 884, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    3. Sai-fu Fung & Esther Oi-wah Chow & Chau-kiu Cheung, 2020. "Development and Evaluation of the Psychometric Properties of a Brief Wisdom Development Scale," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(8), pages 1-14, April.
    4. Zaitun Mohd Saman & Ab Hamid Siti-Azrin & Azizah Othman & Yee Cheng Kueh, 2021. "The Validity and Reliability of the Malay Version of the Cyberbullying Scale among Secondary School Adolescents in Malaysia," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(21), pages 1-12, November.
    5. Luo, Nanyu & Ji, Feng & Han, Yuting & He, Jinbo & Zhang, Xiaoya, 2024. "Fitting item response theory models using deep learning computational frameworks," OSF Preprints tjxab, Center for Open Science.
    6. Sam S. S. Lau & Cherry C. Y. Ho & Rebecca C. K. Pang & Susan Su & Heather Kwok & Sai-fu Fung & Roger C. Ho, 2022. "COVID-19 Burnout Subject to the Dynamic Zero-COVID Policy in Hong Kong: Development and Psychometric Evaluation of the COVID-19 Burnout Frequency Scale," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-13, July.
    7. Beatriz Talavera-Velasco & Lourdes Luceño-Moreno & Jesús Martín García & Daniel Vázquez-Estévez, 2018. "DECORE-21: Assessment of occupational stress in police. Confirmatory factor analysis of the original model," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(10), pages 1-11, October.
    8. Jasna Mesarić & Diana Šimić & Milica Katić & Ellen Catharina Tveter Deilkås & Dag Hofoss & Gunnar Tschudi Bondevik, 2020. "The safety attitudes questionnaire for out-of-hours service in primary healthcare—Psychometric properties of the Croatian version," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(11), pages 1-17, November.
    9. Björn Andersson & Tao Xin, 2021. "Estimation of Latent Regression Item Response Theory Models Using a Second-Order Laplace Approximation," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 46(2), pages 244-265, April.
    10. Carlos Miguel Lemos & Ross Joseph Gore & Ivan Puga-Gonzalez & F LeRon Shults, 2019. "Dimensionality and factorial invariance of religiosity among Christians and the religiously unaffiliated: A cross-cultural analysis based on the International Social Survey Programme," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(5), pages 1-36, May.
    11. Daniel L. Oberski, 2016. "A Review of Latent Variable Modeling With R," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 41(2), pages 226-233, April.
    12. Attanasio, Orazio & Blundell, Richard & Conti, Gabriella & Mason, Giacomo, 2020. "Inequality in socio-emotional skills: A cross-cohort comparison," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    13. Jenna Hicks & Jessica Dewey & Yaniv Brandvain & Anita Schuchardt, 2020. "Development of the Biological Variation In Experimental Design And Analysis (BioVEDA) assessment," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-21, July.
    14. Iván Sánchez-Iglesias & Mónica Bernaldo-de-Quirós & Francisco J. Estupiñá & Ignacio Fernández-Arias & Marta Labrador & Marina Vallejo-Achón & Jesús Saiz & Francisco J. Labrador, 2022. "Maladaptive Cognitions in Adolescents and Young Adults When They Play: The Dysfunctional Cognitions in Gaming Scale (DCG)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-15, December.
    15. Gerhard Tutz & Moritz Berger, 2016. "Response Styles in Rating Scales," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 41(3), pages 239-268, June.
    16. Angel M. Dzhambov & Peter Lercher & Drozdstoy Stoyanov & Nadezhda Petrova & Stoyan Novakov & Donka D. Dimitrova, 2021. "University Students’ Self-Rated Health in Relation to Perceived Acoustic Environment during the COVID-19 Home Quarantine," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(5), pages 1-21, March.
    17. Silvia Mariela Méndez-Prado & Vanessa Rodriguez & Kevin Peralta-Rizzo & Patricia Everaert & Martin Valcke, 2023. "An Assessment Tool to Identify the Financial Literacy Level of Financial Education Programs Participants’ Executed by Ecuadorian Financial Institutions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-24, January.
    18. Ulf Böckenholt, 2012. "The Cognitive-Miser Response Model: Testing for Intuitive and Deliberate Reasoning," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 77(2), pages 388-399, April.
    19. Jochen Ranger & Kay Brauer, 2022. "On the Generalized S − X 2 –Test of Item Fit: Some Variants, Residuals, and a Graphical Visualization," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 47(2), pages 202-230, April.
    20. Simon Foster & Meichun Mohler-Kuo, 2020. "The proportion of non-depressed subjects in a study sample strongly affects the results of psychometric analyses of depression symptoms," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-13, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:intell:v:68:y:2018:i:c:p:109-116. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/intelligence .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.