Short Scales – Five Misunderstandings and Ways to Overcome Them

References

• Antunes, B. , Murtagh, F. , Bausewein, C. , Harding, R. , Higginson, I. J. (in press). Screening for depression in advanced disease: Psychometric properties, sensitivity and specificity of two items of the palliative care outcome scale (POS). Journal of Pain and Symptom Management. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2014.06.014. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

• American Educational Research Association . (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

• Beauducel, A. , Leue, A. (2014). Testing the assumption of uncorrelated errors for short scales by means of structural equation modeling. Journal of Individual Differences, 35, 201–211. doi: 10.1027/1614-0001/a000135 First citation in articleLink, Google Scholar

• Credé, M. , Harms, P. , Niehorster, S. , Gaye-Valentine, A. (2012). An evaluation of the consequences of using short measures of the Big Five personality traits. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102, 874–888. doi: 10.1037/a0027403 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

• Cronbach, L. J. , Shavelson, R. J. (2004). My current thoughts on coefficient alpha and successor procedures. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64, 391–418. doi: 10.1177/0013164404266386 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

• Emons, W. H. , Sijtsma, K. , Meijer, R. R. (2007). On the consistency of individual classification using short scales. Psychological Methods, 12, 105. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

• Haig, B. (2005). An abductive theory of scientific method. Psychological Methods, 10, 371–388. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

• Heckman, J. J. (2011). The Economics of Inequality: The value of early childhood education. American Educator, 35, 31. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

• Heene, M. , Bollmann, S. , Bühner, M. (2014). Much ado about nothing, or much to do about something? Effects of scale shortening on criterion validity and mean differences. Journal of Individual Differences, 35, 245–249. doi: 10.1027/1614-0001/a000146 First citation in articleAbstract, Google Scholar

• Kemper, C. J. , Beierlein, C. , Kovaleva, A. , Rammstedt, B. (2013). Entwicklung und Validierung einer ultrakurzen Operationalisierung des Konstrukts Optimismus-Pessimismus [Development and validation of an ultrashort measure for the construct of optimism-pessimism-The Scale Optimism-Pessimism-2 (SOP2)]. Diagnostica, 59, 119–129. First citation in articleLink, Google Scholar

• Kemper, C. J. , Brähler, E. , Zenger, M. (2013). Psychologische und sozialwissenschaftliche Kurzskalen für Wissenschaft und Praxis – Eine Einführung [Short Scales from Psychology and Social Sciences – an introduction]. In C. J. Kemper, E. Brähler, I. Zenger (Eds.) Psychologische und sozialwissenschaftliche Kurzskalen (pp. 1–7). Berlin: MWV Medizinisch Wissenschaftliche Verlagsgesellschaft. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

• Kruyen, P. M. (2012). Making decisions about individuals using tests and questionnaires: When is short too short? Dissertation, Ridderkerk, The Netherlands First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

• Kruyen, P. M. , Emons, W. H. , Sijtsma, K. (2012). Test length and decision quality in personnel selection: When is short too short? International Journal of Testing, 12, 321–344. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

• Kruyen, P. M. , Emons, W. H. , Sijtsma, K. (2013a). On the shortcomings of shortened tests: A literature review. International Journal of Testing, 13, 223–248. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

• Kruyen, P. M. , Emons, W. H. , Sijtsma, K. (2013b). Shortening the S-STAI: Consequences for research and clinical practice. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 75, 167–172. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2013.03.013 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

• Kruyen, P. M. , Emons, W. H. , Sijtsma, K. (2014). Assessing individual change using short tests and questionnaires. Applied Psychological Measurement, 38, 201–216. doi: 10.1177/0146621613510061 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

• Kuncel, N. R. , Hezlett, S. A. , Ones, D. S. (2004). Academic performance, career potential, creativity, and job performance: Can one construct predict them all? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 148–161. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

• Lämmle, L. , Ziegler, M. , Seidel, I. , Worth, A. , Bös, K. (2012). Four classes of physical fitness in German children and adolescents: Only differences in performance or at-risk groups? International Journal of Public Health, 58, 187–196. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

• Lindqvist, E. , Vestman, R. (2011). The Labor Market Returns to Cognitive and Noncognitive Ability: Evidence from the Swedish Enlistment. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 3, 101–128. doi: 10.1257/app.3.1.101 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

• McCrae, R. R. , Kurtz, J. E. , Yamagata, S. , Terracciano, A. (2011). Internal consistency, retest reliability, and their implications for personality scale validity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 15, 28–50. doi: 10.1177/1088868310366253 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

• Oshio, A. , Abe, S. , Cutrone, P. , Gosling, S. D. (2014). Further validity of the Japanese version of the Ten Item Personality Inventory (TIPI-J): Cross-language evidence for content validity. Journal of Individual Differences, 35, 236–244. doi: 10.1027/1614-0001/a000145 First citation in articleLink, Google Scholar

• Rammstedt, B. , Beierlein, C. (2014). Can’t we make it any shorter? The limits of personality assessment and ways to overcome them. Journal of Individual Differences, 35, 212–220. doi: 10.1027/1614-0001/a000141 First citation in articleAbstract, Google Scholar

• Roberts, B. W. , Kuncel, N. R. , Shiner, R. , Caspi, A. , Goldberg, L. R. (2007). The power of personality: The comparative validity of personality traits, socioeconomic status, and cognitive ability for predicting important life outcomes. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2, 313–345. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-6916.2007.00047.x First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

• Sandy, C. J. , Gosling, S. D. , Koelkebeck, T. (2014). Psychometric comparison of automated vs. rational methods of scale abbreviation: An illustration using a brief measure of values. Journal of Individual Differences, 35, 221–235. doi: 10.1027/1614-0001/a000144 First citation in articleAbstract, Google Scholar

• Schipolowski, S. , Schroeders, U. , Wilhelm, O. (2014). Pitfalls and challenges in constructing short forms of cognitive ability measures. Journal of Individual Differences, 35, 190–200. doi: 10.1027/1614-0001/a000134 First citation in articleLink, Google Scholar

• Sijtsma, K. (2009). On the use, the misuse, and the very limited usefulness of Cronbach’s alpha. Psychometrika, 74, 107–120. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

• Smith, G. T. , McCarthy, D. M. , Anderson, K. G. (2000). On the sins of short-form development. Psychological Assessment, 12, 102. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

• Thalmayer, A. G. , Saucier, G. , Eigenhuis, A. (2011). Comparative validity of brief to medium-length Big Five and Big Six personality questionnaires. Psychological Assessment, 23, 995–1009. doi: 10.1037/a0024165 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

• Ziegler, M. , Kemper, C. , Rammstedt, B. (2013). The Vocabulary and Overclaiming Test (VOC-T). Journal of Individual Differences, 34, 32–40. First citation in articleLink, Google Scholar

• Ziegler, M. , Poropat, A. , Mell, J. (2014). Does the length of a questionnaire matter? Expected and unexpected answers from generalizability theory. Journal of Individual Differences, 35, 250–261. doi: 10.1027/1614-0001/a000147 First citation in articleAbstract, Google Scholar

• Zinbarg, R. E. , Revelle, W. , Yovel, I. , Li, W. (2005). Cronbach’s α, Revelle’s β, and McDonald’s ω H: Their relations with each other and two alternative conceptualizations of reliability. Psychometrika, 70, 123–133. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar