References
- Adams, R. J., Wu, M. L., & Wilson, M. (2012). The Rasch rating model and the disordered threshold controversy. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 72(4), 547–573. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164411432166
- Anker, M. G., Duncan, B. L., & Sparks, J. A. (2009). Using client feedback to improve couple therapy outcomes: A randomized clinical trial in a naturalistic setting. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 77(4), 693–704. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016062
- Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. O. (2018). SRMR in Mplus. http://www.statmodel.com/download/SRMR2.pdf
- Boswell, J. F., Kraus, D. R., Miller, S. D., & Lambert, M. J. (2015). Implementing routine outcome monitoring in clinical practice: Benefits, challenges, and solutions. Psychotherapy Research, 25(1), 6–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/10503307.2013.817696
- Bringhurst, D. L., Watson, C. W., Miller, S. D., & Duncan, B. L. (2006). The reliability and validity of the Outcome Rating Scale: A replication study of a brief clinical measure. Journal of Brief Therapy, 5, 23–30.
- Brosseau-Liard, P., Savalei, V., & Li, L. (2012). An investigation of the sample performance of two nonnormality corrections for RMSEA. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 47(6), 904–930. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2012.715252
- Cai, L. (2017). flexMIRT 3.5: Flexible multilevel and multidimensional item response theory analysis and test scoring [Computer software]. Vector Psychometric Group, LLC.
- Cai, L., & Monroe, S. (2014). A new statistic for evaluating item response theory models for ordinal data. (Report No. 839). CRESST.
- Campbell, A., & Hemsley, S. (2009). Outcome Rating Scale and Session Rating Scale in psychological practice: Clinical utility of ultra-brief measures. Clinical Psychologist, 13(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/13284200802676391
- Chen, W., & Thissen, D. (1997). Local dependence indexes for item pairs using item response theory. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 22(3), 265–289. https://doi.org/10.2307/1165285
- Cook, K. F., Ashton, C. M., Byrne, M. M., Brody, B., Geraci, J., Giesler, R. B., Hanita, M., Souchek, J., & Wray, N. P. (2001). A psychometric analysis of the measurement level of the rating scale, time trade-off, and standard gamble. Social Science & Medicine, 53(10), 1275–1285. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0277-9536(00)00409-3
- De Ayala, R. J. (2009). The theory and practice of item response theory. Guilford.
- Duncan, B. (2011). The Partners for Change Outcome Management System (PCOMS): Administration, scoring, interpreting update for the Outcome and Session Ratings Scale. Author.
- Duncan, B. L. (2012). The partners for change outcome management system (PCOMS): The Heart and Soul of Change Project. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne, 53(2), 93–104. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027762
- Edelen, M. O., & Reeve, B. B. (2007). Applying item response theory (IRT) modeling to questionnaire development, evaluation, and refinement. Quality of Life Research, 16(S1), 5–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-007-9198-0
- Edwards, M. C. (2009). An introduction to item response theory using the need for cognition scale. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 3(4), 507–529. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2009.00194.x
- Gillaspy, J. A., & Murphy, J. J. (2011). The use of ultra-brief client feedback tools in SFBT. In C. W. Franklin, T. Trepper, E. McCollum, & W. Gingerich (Eds.). Solution-focused brief therapy (pp. 73–94). Oxford University Press.
- Hewlett, S., Hehir, M., & Kirwan, J. R. (2007). Measuring fatigue in reheumatoid arthritis: A systematic review of scales in use. Arthritis & Rheumatism, 57(3), 429–439. https://doi.org/10.1002/art.22611
- Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
- Kelley, K. (2018). The MBESS R package. R package version 4.4.3.
- Kenny, D. A., Kaniskan, B., & McCoach, D. B. (2013). The performance of RMSEA in models with small degrees of freedom (Unpublished paper). University of Connecticut.
- Kersten, P., White, P. J., & Tennant, A. (2010). The visual analogue WOMAC 3.0 scale – internal validity and responsiveness of the VAS version. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 11(1), 80. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-11-80
- Kersten, P., White, P. J., & Tennant, A. (2014). Is the pain visual analogue scale linear and responsive to change? An exploration using Rasch analysis. PLoS One, 9(6), e99485. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0099485
- Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.). Guilford Press.
- Knutsson, I., Rydström, H., Reimer, J., Nyberg, P., & Hagell, P. (2010). Interpretation of response categories in patient-reported rating scales: A controlled study among people with Parkinson’s disease. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 8(1), 61. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-8-61
- Lambert, M. J. (2010). Yes, it is time for clinicians to monitor treatment outcome. In B. L. Duncan, S. C., Miller, B. E. Wampold, & M. A. Hubble (Eds.), Heart and soul of change: Delivering what works in therapy (2nd ed., pp. 239–266). American Psychological Association.
- Lambert, M. J., Hansen, N. B., Umphress, V., Lunnen, K., Okiishi, J., Burlingame, G. M., & Reisinger, C. (1996). Administration and scoring manual for the OQ 45.2. American Professional Credentialing Services.
- Lerdal, A., Kottorp, A., Gay, C. L., & Lee, K. A. (2013). Lee fatigue and energy scales: Exploring aspects of validity in a sample of women with HIV using an application of a Rasch model. Psychiatry Research, 205(3), 241–246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2012.08.031
- Linacre, J. M. (1998). Visual analog scales. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 12, 639.
- Miller, S. D., & Duncan, B. L. (2000). The outcome rating scale. Authors.
- Reese, R. J., Gillaspy, J. A., Jr., Owen, J. J., Flora, K. L., Cunningham, L. C., Archie, D., & Marsden, T. (2013). The influence of demand characteristics and social desirability on clients’ ratings of the therapeutic alliance. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 69(7), 696–709. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.21946
- Reese, R. J., Toland, M. D., Slone, N. C., & Norsworthy, L. A. (2010). Effect of client feedback on couple psychotherapy outcomes. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 47(4), 616–630. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021182
- Reise, S. P., & Rodriguez, A. (2016). Item response theory and the measurement of psychiatric constructs: Some empirical and conceptual issues and challenges. Psychological Medicine, 46(10), 2025–2039. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291716000520
- Roberts, J. S. (2008). Modified likelihood-based item fit statistics for the generalized graded unfolding model. Applied Psychological Measurement, 32(5), 407–423. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621607301278
- Stark, S. (2008). MODFIT: Plot theoretical item response functions and examine the fit of dichotomous or polytomous IRT models to response data [computer program, version 3.0]. University of South Florida.
- Stone, C. A., & Zhang, B. (2003). Assessing goodness of fit of item response theory models: A comparison of traditional and alternative procedures. Journal of Educational Measurement, 40(4), 331–352. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3984.2003.tb01150.x
- Tay, L., Meade, A., & Cao, M. (2015). An overview and practical guide to IRT measurement equivalence analysis. Organizational Research Methods, 18(1), 3–46. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114553062
- Torrance, G. W., Feeny, D., & Furlong, W. (2001). Visual analogue scales: Do they have a role in the measurement of preferences for health states? Medical Decision Making, 21(4), 329–334. https://doi.org/10.1177/02729890122062622
- van der Maas, H. L. J., Molenaar, D., Maris, G., Kievit, R. A., & Borsboom, D. (2011). Cognitive psychology meets psychometric theory: On the relation between process models for decision making and latent variables models for individual differences. Psychological Review, 118(2), 339–356. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022749
- Wright, B. D., & Linacre, J. M. (1989). Observations are always ordinal; measurements, however, must be interval. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 70, 857–860.