An empirical assessment of the cross-national measurement validity of graded paired comparisons

Beuckelaer, Alain De; Kampen, Jarl K.; Trijp, J.C.M. van

doi:10.1007/s11135-011-9583-1

Cited by 10 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A change of criterion used to select a preference (e.g., naturalness, ease of understanding) within the same environment may influence the participant’s preference (Keidser, 1995), and consequently the consistency of their responses. In view of the number of preferences to be completed and the unlimited time provided, it is also possible some participants lost motivation or changed their self-chosen criterion part-way through due to boredom and/or fatigue (De Beuckelaer et al., 2013). However, the consistency of preference of participants who did not pass the MoCA screening measure, or those who were nonnative speakers of English, did not stand out from other participants, suggesting the cognitive processes necessary to obtain consistent preferences are unaffected by such characteristics.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Consistency of Hearing Aid Setting Preference in Simulated Real-World Environments: Implications for Trainable Hearing Aids

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Trainable hearing aids let users fine-tune their hearing aid settings in their own listening environment: Based on consistent user-adjustments and information about the acoustic environment, the trainable aids will change environment-specific settings to the user’s preference. A requirement for effective fine-tuning is consistency of preference for similar settings in similar environments. The aim of this study was to evaluate consistency of preference for settings differing in intensity, gain-frequency slope, and directionality when listening in simulated real-world environments and to determine if participants with more consistent preferences could be identified based on profile measures. A total of 52 adults (63–88 years) with hearing varying from normal to a moderate sensorineural hearing loss selected their preferred setting from pairs differing in intensity (3 or 6 dB), gain-frequency slope (±1.3 or ± 2.7 dB/octave), or directionality (omnidirectional vs. cardioid) in four simulated real-world environments: traffic noise, a monologue in traffic noise at 5 dB signal-to-noise ratio, and a dialogue in café noise at 5 and at 0 dB signal-to-noise ratio. Forced-choice comparisons were made 10 times for each combination of pairs of settings and environment. Participants also completed nine psychoacoustic, cognitive, and personality measures. Consistency of preference, defined by a setting preferred at least 9 out of 10 times, varied across participants. More participants obtained consistent preferences for larger differences between settings and less difficult environments. The profile measures did not predict consistency of preference. Trainable aid users could benefit from counselling to ensure realistic expectations for particular adjustments and listening situations.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Consistency of Hearing Aid Setting Preference in Simulated Real-World Environments: Implications for Trainable Hearing Aids

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the past, GPCs have primarily been used to investigate consumer preferences (e.g., De Beuckelaer et al, 2013;Agresti, 1992;Alfaro-Rodriguez et al, 2005;Ofir, 2004). For example, in marketing research GPCs are often employed in the context of conjoint analyses (e.g., Scholz et al, 2010).…”

Section: Graded Paired Comparisons As a Psychometric Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Indeed, first applications of the Thurstonian IRT model for graded comparisons found reliability gains between .07 and .10 when switching from discrete forced-choice to GPCs (Brown & Maydeu-Olivares, 2018). Unfortunately, re-implementing a Likert scale also brings back typical method-related response biases such as extreme responding, but empirical results suggest these effects to be negligible (De Beuckelaer et al, 2013). Further, test-takers still have to contrast the two opposing statements within one comparison, which means they cannot fully endorse all desirable statements.…”

Section: Graded Paired Comparisons As a Psychometric Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Fakeability of Personality Measurement with Graded Paired Comparisons

Schulte¹,

Kaup²,

P-C³

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This pre-registered study compares the faking resistance of Likert scales and graded paired comparisons (GPCs) analyzed with Thurstonian IRT models. Based on findings on other forced-choice formats, we hypothesized that GPCs would be more resistant to faking than Likert scales by resulting in lower score inflation and better recovery of applicants’ true (i.e., honest) trait scores. A total of N = 573 participants completed either the Likert or GPC version of a personality questionnaire first honestly and then in an applicant scenario. Results show that participants were able to increase their scores in both the Likert and GPC format, though their score inflation was smaller in the GPC than the Likert format. However, GPCs did not exhibit higher honest–faking correlations than Likert scales; under certain conditions, we even observed negative associations. These results challenge mean score inflation as the dominant paradigm for judging the utility of foeced-choice questionnaires in high-stakes situations. Even if FC factor scores are less inflated, their ability to recover true trait standings in high-stakes situations might be lower compared with Likert scales. Moreover, in the GPC format, faking effects correlated almost perfectly with the social desirability differences of the corresponding statements, highlighting the importance of matching statements equal in social desirability when constructing forced-choice questionnaires.

show abstract

“…naturalness, ease of understanding) within the same environment may influence the participant's preference (Keidser, 1995), and consequently the consistency of their responses. In view of the number of preferences to be completed and the unlimited time provided, it is also possible some participants lost motivation or changed their self-chosen criterion part-way through due to boredom and/or fatigue (De Beuckelaer, Kampen, & Van Trijp, 2013). The consistency of preference of participants who did not pass the MoCA screening measure, or those who were nonnative speakers of English, did not stand out from other participants, suggesting the tasks necessary to obtain consistent preferences are unaffected by such characteristics.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trainable hearing aids in practice: impact and application

Walravens¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To both my supervisors, thank you for being my guides since I started my research journey. Your research experience has been invaluable. Thank you, Gitte, for providing me with a patient and sound start in research, and valuable life advice. Louise, thank you for being my guide into the world of qualitative research, it has been eye-opening.Thank you to The HEARing CRC for the opportunity to turn a research project into this PhD, and to Mark Seeto for proofreading parts of this thesis. Dank u, mama en papa voor jullie onaflatende steun in mijn avonturen, goeie raad en relativering. Dankzij de wekelijkse samenkomst op Skype voel ik me nog altijd een deel van de familie, danku Sara en Bram. Bedankt Meme voor al de uren aan de telefoon, het delen van uw verhalen en levenservaring.Jens, thank you for all your time, for sharing and traveling with me, for listening and being part of my life. Experiments and footprints. H 3 .And then there are those who made me feel welcome when I moved countries and states, helped me along my audiological and life journey and became friends along the way, thank you.A special thank you to Rudy and Yingru for providing me with a second home.Thank you, NALites, it has been an adventure working with colleagues from different fields and cultures, who together make NAL such a unique working environment.And finally, thank you to the participants whose effort is captured between the pages of this thesis, especially those who attended for not one but two studies with multiple appointments, the time you have dedicated to hearing research is very much appreciated.ixFinancial support This research was supported by an Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship and conducted by The HEARing CRC, established under the Australian Government's Cooperative Research Centres (CRC) Program. The CRC Program supports industry-led collaborations between industry, researchers and the community. The candidate acknowledges the financial support of the Australian Government through the Department of Health.

show abstract

An empirical assessment of the cross-national measurement validity of graded paired comparisons

Cited by 10 publications

References 39 publications

Consistency of Hearing Aid Setting Preference in Simulated Real-World Environments: Implications for Trainable Hearing Aids

Consistency of Hearing Aid Setting Preference in Simulated Real-World Environments: Implications for Trainable Hearing Aids

The Fakeability of Personality Measurement with Graded Paired Comparisons

Trainable hearing aids in practice: impact and application

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About