2016
DOI: 10.1177/0734282916653701
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Importance of Item Wording

Abstract: In the current research, we illustrate the impact that item wording has on the content of personality scales and how differences in item wording influence empirical results. We present evidence indicating that items in certain scales used to measure "adaptive" perfectionism fail to capture the disabling all-or-nothing approach that is synonymous with the individual who is driven to attain perfection. Original and modified versions of two perfectionism measures of high personal standards and modified perfection… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
23
0
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 52 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 42 publications
(59 reference statements)
1
23
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Most strikingly, the experimentally manipulated version of conscientiousness correlated strongly and positively with obsessive-compulsive personality, and agreeableness correlated strongly with dependent and avoidant personality disorders (while the original NEOPI-R scales showed mostly zero correlations). This study empirically supports the idea that already slight changes in item wording can change the construct that is measured (which was also found in a recent study by Blasberg et al, 2016) and its desirability/adaptiveness.…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 90%
“…Most strikingly, the experimentally manipulated version of conscientiousness correlated strongly and positively with obsessive-compulsive personality, and agreeableness correlated strongly with dependent and avoidant personality disorders (while the original NEOPI-R scales showed mostly zero correlations). This study empirically supports the idea that already slight changes in item wording can change the construct that is measured (which was also found in a recent study by Blasberg et al, 2016) and its desirability/adaptiveness.…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 90%
“…Finally, the statistical parameters of the C-DAPS (i.e. factor structure and measurement invariance) were only acceptable and the presented scale seems to possess both advantages and disadvantages of the APS and DAPS [13,43]. Therefore, in future studies, the psychometric properties of the C-DAPS should be carefully evaluated further, especially in cultures other than Polish.…”
Section: Limitations Of the Studymentioning
confidence: 92%
“…The hypotheses set forth by separating excellencism from PSP (see Table 1 and Table 2) could not have been envisioned or empirically investigated using conscientiousness as a counterpoint to perfectionism. Similar labels such as “conscientious achievement striving” or “conscientious striving for excellence” (Blasberg, Hewitt, Flett, Sherry, & Chen, 2016; Hill, Hall, & Appleton, 2012) have sporadically been used to separate healthy strivings from perfectionism. However, using “conscientious” with “striving for excellence” is ambiguous and unnecessary to offer a fruitful conceptual distinction.…”
Section: Excellencism and Psp Versus Conscientiousnessmentioning
confidence: 99%