NotesFAQContact Us
Collection
Advanced
Search Tips
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
ERIC Number: EJ917502
Record Type: Journal
Publication Date: 2011-Mar
Pages: 17
Abstractor: As Provided
Reference Count: 34
ISBN: N/A
ISSN: ISSN-1040-3590
Bifactor and Item Response Theory Analyses of Interviewer Report Scales of Cognitive Impairment in Schizophrenia
Reise, Steven P.; Ventura, Joseph; Keefe, Richard S. E.; Baade, Lyle E.; Gold, James M.; Green, Michael F.; Kern, Robert S.; Mesholam-Gately, Raquelle; Nuechterlein, Keith H.; Seidman, Larry J.; Bilder, Robert
Psychological Assessment, v23 n1 p245-261 Mar 2011
A psychometric analysis of 2 interview-based measures of cognitive deficits was conducted: the 21-item Clinical Global Impression of Cognition in Schizophrenia (CGI-CogS; Ventura et al., 2008), and the 20-item Schizophrenia Cognition Rating Scale (SCoRS; Keefe et al., 2006), which were administered on 2 occasions to a sample of people with schizophrenia. Traditional psychometrics, bifactor analysis, and item response theory methods were used to explore item functioning and dimensionality and to compare instruments. Despite containing similar item content, responses to the CGI-CogS demonstrated superior psychometric properties (e.g., higher item intercorrelations, better spread of ratings across response categories) relative to the SCoRS. The authors argue that these differences arise mainly from the differential use of prompts and how the items are phrased and scored. Bifactor analysis demonstrated that although both measures capture a broad range of cognitive functioning (e.g., working memory, social cognition), the common variance on each is overwhelmingly explained by a single general factor. Item response theory analyses of the combined pool of 41 items showed that measurement precision is peaked in the mild to moderate range of cognitive impairment. Finally, simulated adaptive testing revealed that only about 10 to 12 items are necessary to achieve latent trait level estimates with reasonably small standard errors for most individuals. This suggests that these interview-based measures of cognitive deficits could be shortened without loss of measurement precision. (Contains 5 tables, 5 figures, and 1 footnote.)
American Psychological Association. Journals Department, 750 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20002-4242. Tel: 800-374-2721; Tel: 202-336-5510; Fax: 202-336-5502; e-mail: order@apa.org; Web site: http://www.apa.org/publications
Publication Type: Journal Articles; Reports - Research
Education Level: N/A
Audience: N/A
Language: English
Sponsor: N/A
Authoring Institution: N/A