Examining the Process of Responding to Circumplex Scales of Interpersonal Values Items: Should Ideal Point Scoring Methods Be Considered?

References

• Akaike, H. (1974). A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 19, 716–723.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bem, S. L. (1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of Counseling and Clinical Psychology, 42, 155–162.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carter, N. T., & Dalal, D. K. (2010). An ideal point account of the JDI Work Satisfaction scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 49, 743–748.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carter, N. T., Dalal, D. K., Boyce, A. S., O'Connell, M. S., Kung, M. C., & Delgado, K. M. (2014). Uncovering curvilinear relationships between conscientiousness and job performance: How theoretically appropriate measurement makes an empirical difference. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99, 564–586.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chernyshenko, O., Stark, S., Drasgow, F., & Roberts, B. (2007). Constructing personality scales under the assumptions of an ideal point response process: Toward increasing the flexibility of personality measures. Psychological Assessment, 19, 88–106.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2. Auflage). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Dalal, D. K., & Carter, N. T. (2015). Consequences of ignoring ideal point items for applied decisions and criterion-related validity estimates. Journal of Business and Psychology, 30, 483–498.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Embretson, S. E., & Reise, S. P. (2000). Item response theory for psychologists. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Glas, C. A. (1988). The derivation of some tests for the Rasch model from the multinomial distribution. Psychometrika, 53, 525–546.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grassi, M., Luccio, R., & Di Blas, L. (2010). CircE: An R implementation of Browne's circular stochastic process model. Behavior Research Methods, 42, 55–73.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gurtman, M. B., & Pincus, A. L. (2003). The circumplex model: Methods and research applications. In J. A. Schinka & W. F. Velicer (Eds.), Handbook of psychology: Research methods in psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 407–428). New York, NY: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Herrmann, A., & Pfister, H. R. (2013). Simple measures and complex structures: Is it worth employing a more complex model of personality in Big Five inventories? Journal of Research in Personality, 47, 599–608.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hopwood, C. J., Ansell, E. B., Pincus, A. L., Wright, A. G. C., Lukowitsky, M. R., & Roche, M. J. (2011). The circumplex structure of interpersonal sensitivities. Journal of Personality, 79, 707–740.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hopwood, C. J., & Donnellan, M. B. (2010). How should the internal structure of personality inventories be evaluated? Personality and Social Psychology Review, 14, 332–346.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kammrath, L. K., & Scholer, A. A. (2011). The Pollyanna myth: How highly agreeable people judge positive and negative relational acts. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37, 1172–1184.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Locke, K. D. (2000). Circumplex scales of interpersonal values: Reliability, validity, and applicability to interpersonal problems and personality disorders. Journal of Personality Assessment, 75, 249–267.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Locke, K. D. (2003). Status and solidarity in social comparison: Agentic and communal values and vertical and horizontal directions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 619.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Locke, K. D. (2011). Circumplex measures of interpersonal constructs. In L. M. Horowitz & S. Strack (Eds.), Handbook of interpersonal psychology: Theory, research, assessment and therapeutic interventions (pp. 313–324). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Locke, K. D., & Adamic, E. J. (2012). Interpersonal circumplex vector length and interpersonal decision making. Personality and Individual Differences, 53, 764–769.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Locke, K. D., & Christensen, L. (2007). Re-construing the relational-interdependent self-construal and its relationship with self-consistency. Journal of Research in Personality, 41, 389–402.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Locke, K. D., Craig, T., Baik, K. D., & Gohil, K. (2012). Binds and bounds of communion: Effects of interpersonal values on assumed similarity of self and others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103, 879–897.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Locke, K. D., & Sadler, P. (2007). Self-efficacy, values, and complementarity in dyadic interactions: Integrating interpersonal and social-cognitive theory. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 94–109.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muraki, E. (1992). A generalized partial credit model: Application of an EM algorithm. Applied Psychological Measurement, 16, 159–176.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muraki, E., & Bock, D. (2003). Parscale for Windows (Version 4.1). Chicago, IL: Scientific Software International.
   Google Scholar
• R Core Team. (2013). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved from http://www.R-project.org/
   Google Scholar
• Reckase, M. D. (1979). Unifactor latent trait models applied to multifactor tests: Results and implications. Journal of Educational Statistics, 4, 207–230.
   Google Scholar
• Roberts, J., Donoghue, J., & Laughlin, J. (2000). A general item response theory model for unfolding unidimensional polytomous responses. Applied Psychological Measurement, 24, 3–32.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roberts, J., Fang, H., Cui, W., & Wang, Y. (2006). GGUM2004: A Windows-based program to estimate parameters of the generalized graded unfolding model. Applied Psychological Measurement, 30, 64–65.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roberts, J., Laughlin, J., & Wedell, D. (1999). Validity issues in the Likert and Thurstone approaches to attitude measurement. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 59, 211–233.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roberts, J., & Shim, H. (2008). GGUM2004 technical reference manual. Atlanta, GA: Georgia Institute of Technology. Retrieved from http://www.psychology.gatech.edu.unfolding/FreeSoftware.html
   Google Scholar
• Schwarz, G. (1978). Estimating the dimension of a model. Annals of Statistics, 6, 461–464.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sodano, S. M., & Tracey, T. J. G. (2011). A brief inventory of interpersonal problems–circumplex using nonparametric item response theory: Introducing the IIP–C–IRT. Journal of Personality Assessment, 93, 62–75.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stark, S. (2001). MODFIT: A computer program for model-data fit. Champaign, IL: University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign.
   Google Scholar
• Stark, S., Chernyshenko, O. S., Drasgow, F., & Williams, B. A. (2006). Examining assumptions about item responding in personality assessment: Should ideal point methods be considered for scale development and scoring? Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 25–39.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thomas, A., Kirchmann, H., Suess, H., Brautigam, S., & Strauss, B. M. (2012). Motivational determinants of interpersonal distress: How interpersonal goals are related to interpersonal problems. Psychotherapy Research, 22, 489–501.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turan, B., Guo, J., Boggiano, M. M., & Bedgood, D. (2014). Dominant, cold, avoidant, and lonely: Basal testosterone as a biological marker for an interpersonal style. Journal of Research in Personality, 50, 84–89.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turan, B., & Horowitz, L. M. (2010). The motive for support and the identification of responsive partners. Journal of Research in Personality, 44, 342–352.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van den Wollenberg, A. L. (1982). Two new test statistics for the Rasch model. Psychometrika, 47, 123–140.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wetzel, E., & Hell, B. (2014). Multidimensional item response theory models in vocational interest measurement: An illustration using the AIST–R. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 32, 342–355.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiggins, J. S. (2003). Paradigms of personality assessment. New York, NY: Guilford.
   Google Scholar
• Zickar, M. J., & Broadfoot, A. A. (2009). The partial revival of a dead horse? Comparing classical test theory and item response theory. In C. E. Lance & R. J. Vandenberg (Eds.), Statistical and methodological myths and urban legends: Doctrine, verity, and fable in the organizational and social sciences (pp. 37–60). New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar