Limits...
Using item response theory to investigate the structure of anticipated affect: do self-reports about future affective reactions conform to typical or maximal models?

Zampetakis LA, Lerakis M, Kafetsios K, Moustakis V - Front Psychol (2015)

Bottom Line: In the present research, we used item response theory (IRT) to examine whether effective predictions (anticipated affect) conforms to a typical (i.e., what people usually do) or a maximal behavior process (i.e., what people can do).We found that the GRM provided a better fit to the data.The paper also discusses implications for a growing literature on anticipated affect.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Management Systems Laboratory, School of Production Engineering and Management, Technical University of Crete Chania, Greece.

ABSTRACT
In the present research, we used item response theory (IRT) to examine whether effective predictions (anticipated affect) conforms to a typical (i.e., what people usually do) or a maximal behavior process (i.e., what people can do). The former, correspond to non-monotonic ideal point IRT models, whereas the latter correspond to monotonic dominance IRT models. A convenience, cross-sectional student sample (N = 1624) was used. Participants were asked to report on anticipated positive and negative affect around a hypothetical event (emotions surrounding the start of a new business). We carried out analysis comparing graded response model (GRM), a dominance IRT model, against generalized graded unfolding model, an unfolding IRT model. We found that the GRM provided a better fit to the data. Findings suggest that the self-report responses to anticipated affect conform to dominance response process (i.e., maximal behavior). The paper also discusses implications for a growing literature on anticipated affect.

No MeSH data available.


Graphical representation of the unfolding versus dominance response process: (A) item response function for an ideal point response process and (B) item response function for a dominance response process.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4585228&req=5

Figure 1: Graphical representation of the unfolding versus dominance response process: (A) item response function for an ideal point response process and (B) item response function for a dominance response process.

Mentions: In Figure 1, we graphically represent the patterns behind the two different response processes. A single-peaked, non-monotonic function is the key feature that distinguishes unfolding IRT models (Figure 1A) from traditional, dominance or cumulative IRT models (Figure 1B; Stark et al., 2006).


Using item response theory to investigate the structure of anticipated affect: do self-reports about future affective reactions conform to typical or maximal models?

Zampetakis LA, Lerakis M, Kafetsios K, Moustakis V - Front Psychol (2015)

Graphical representation of the unfolding versus dominance response process: (A) item response function for an ideal point response process and (B) item response function for a dominance response process.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4585228&req=5

Figure 1: Graphical representation of the unfolding versus dominance response process: (A) item response function for an ideal point response process and (B) item response function for a dominance response process.
Mentions: In Figure 1, we graphically represent the patterns behind the two different response processes. A single-peaked, non-monotonic function is the key feature that distinguishes unfolding IRT models (Figure 1A) from traditional, dominance or cumulative IRT models (Figure 1B; Stark et al., 2006).

Bottom Line: In the present research, we used item response theory (IRT) to examine whether effective predictions (anticipated affect) conforms to a typical (i.e., what people usually do) or a maximal behavior process (i.e., what people can do).We found that the GRM provided a better fit to the data.The paper also discusses implications for a growing literature on anticipated affect.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Management Systems Laboratory, School of Production Engineering and Management, Technical University of Crete Chania, Greece.

ABSTRACT
In the present research, we used item response theory (IRT) to examine whether effective predictions (anticipated affect) conforms to a typical (i.e., what people usually do) or a maximal behavior process (i.e., what people can do). The former, correspond to non-monotonic ideal point IRT models, whereas the latter correspond to monotonic dominance IRT models. A convenience, cross-sectional student sample (N = 1624) was used. Participants were asked to report on anticipated positive and negative affect around a hypothetical event (emotions surrounding the start of a new business). We carried out analysis comparing graded response model (GRM), a dominance IRT model, against generalized graded unfolding model, an unfolding IRT model. We found that the GRM provided a better fit to the data. Findings suggest that the self-report responses to anticipated affect conform to dominance response process (i.e., maximal behavior). The paper also discusses implications for a growing literature on anticipated affect.

No MeSH data available.