The multidimensional forced-choice format as an alternative for rating scales: Current state of the research.

When constructing a questionnaire to assess a psychological construct, one important decision researchers have to make is how to collect responses from test takers; that is, which response format to implement. We argued in a previous editorial published in the European Journal of Psychological Assessment (EJPA) that this decision deserves more attention and should be an explicit step in the test construction process (Wetzel & Greiff, 2018). The reason for this is that it can be a consequential decision that influences the validity of conclusions we draw about test takers’ trait levels or about relations between constructs and criteria (Brown & Maydeu-Olivares, 2013; Wetzel & Frick, 2020). In this editorial, which can be considered a followup to the first one, we will take a closer look at two response formats: rating scales (RS), the current default in most questionnaires, and the multidimensional forced-choice (MFC) format, an alternative that is currently the focus of a considerable body of research. We will first define the two formats and point out some of their advantages and disadvantages. Then, we will provide a summary and evaluation of research comparing RS and MFC. Third, we will draw some preliminary conclusions on the feasibility of applying MFC as an alternative to RS. Fourth, we will point out some open research questions. We will end with some recommendations and implications for readers and authors of EJPA. In this editorial, the overall goal is to give rese...
Source: European Journal of Psychological Assessment - Category: Psychiatry & Psychology Source Type: research