IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v5y2015i2p2158244015588958.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Rasch Re-Analysis of the Partnership Questionnaire

Author

Listed:
  • Sören Kliem
  • Johannes Beller
  • Christoph Kröger
  • Yve Stöbel-Richter
  • Kurt Hahlweg
  • Elmar Brähler

Abstract

The Partnership Questionnaire (PFB) is used favorably in the German language area to measure partnership quality. The goal of the present study is to re-analyze the subscales of the PFB ( Conflict Behavior, Tenderness, Communication ) via the Rasch model. Polytomous and dichotomous Rasch models were calculated in a population sample ( N = 1,123) and a student-based cross-validation sample ( N = 250) for the three subscales of the PFB. Final models were chosen based on several fit criteria. Good to very good model fit was obtained with symmetrical (Conflict Behavior) or nonsymmetrical (Tenderness, Communication) dichotomously collapsed categories. After adapting the instruction and dichotomizing the categories, the PFB can be used as a checklist ( PFB-checklist ). An additional cross-validation is needed to substantiate the obtained results.

Suggested Citation

  • Sören Kliem & Johannes Beller & Christoph Kröger & Yve Stöbel-Richter & Kurt Hahlweg & Elmar Brähler, 2015. "A Rasch Re-Analysis of the Partnership Questionnaire," SAGE Open, , vol. 5(2), pages 21582440155, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:5:y:2015:i:2:p:2158244015588958
    DOI: 10.1177/2158244015588958
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2158244015588958
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2158244015588958?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mair, Patrick & Hatzinger, Reinhold, 2007. "Extended Rasch Modeling: The eRm Package for the Application of IRT Models in R," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 20(i09).
    2. Erling Andersen, 1973. "A goodness of fit test for the rasch model," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 38(1), pages 123-140, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Tiew Chia Chun & Mohd Ali Samsudin & Melissa Ng Lee Yen Abdullah, 2024. "Psychometric Properties Assessment of Postgraduate Self-Determined Learning Questionnaire (PSLQ): A Mixed Method Approach," SAGE Open, , vol. 14(2), pages 21582440241, May.
    2. Noor Hidayah Che Lah & Zaidatun Tasir & Nurul Farhana Jumaat, 2022. "An Evaluation of the Online Social Learning Environment Instrument (OSLEI) Using Rasch Model Analysis," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(2), pages 21582440221, June.
    3. Krammer, Georg, 2019. "The Andersen likelihood ratio test with a random split criterion lacks power," OSF Preprints gu8sq_v1, Center for Open Science.
    4. Krammer, Georg, 2019. "The Andersen likelihood ratio test with a random split criterion lacks power," OSF Preprints gu8sq, Center for Open Science.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gerhard Tutz & Gunther Schauberger, 2015. "A Penalty Approach to Differential Item Functioning in Rasch Models," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 80(1), pages 21-43, March.
    2. Wenjia Wang & Mickaël Guedj & Viviane Bertrand & Julie Foucquier & Elisabeth Jouve & Daniel Commenges & Cécile Proust-Lima & Niall P Murphy & Olivier Blin & Laurent Magy & Daniel Cohen & Shahram Attar, 2017. "A Rasch Analysis of the Charcot-Marie-Tooth Neuropathy Score (CMTNS) in a Cohort of Charcot-Marie-Tooth Type 1A Patients," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(1), pages 1-14, January.
    3. Clemens Draxler & Andreas Kurz & Can Gürer & Jan Philipp Nolte, 2024. "An Improved Inferential Procedure to Evaluate Item Discriminations in a Conditional Maximum Likelihood Framework," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 49(3), pages 403-430, June.
    4. Arendasy, Martin E. & Sommer, Markus & Tschiesner, Reinhard & Feldhammer-Kahr, Martina & Umdasch, Konstantin, 2024. "Using automatic item generation to construct scheduling problems measuring planning ability," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    5. Krammer, Georg, 2019. "The Andersen likelihood ratio test with a random split criterion lacks power," OSF Preprints gu8sq_v1, Center for Open Science.
    6. Krammer, Georg, 2019. "The Andersen likelihood ratio test with a random split criterion lacks power," OSF Preprints gu8sq, Center for Open Science.
    7. César Merino-Soto & Gina Chávez-Ventura & Verónica López-Fernández & Guillermo M. Chans & Filiberto Toledano-Toledano, 2022. "Learning Self-Regulation Questionnaire (SRQ-L): Psychometric and Measurement Invariance Evidence in Peruvian Undergraduate Students," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-17, September.
    8. Alberto Maydeu-Olivares & Rosa Montaño, 2013. "How Should We Assess the Fit of Rasch-Type Models? Approximating the Power of Goodness-of-Fit Statistics in Categorical Data Analysis," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 78(1), pages 116-133, January.
    9. Lionel WILNER, 2019. "The Dynamics of Individual Happiness," Working Papers 2019-18, Center for Research in Economics and Statistics.
    10. repec:jss:jstsof:39:i08 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Daniela Raccanello & Giada Vicentini & Elena Trifiletti & Roberto Burro, 2020. "A Rasch Analysis of the School-Related Well-Being (SRW) Scale: Measuring Well-Being in the Transition from Primary to Secondary School," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(1), pages 1-17, December.
    12. David J. Hessen, 2023. "Fitting and Testing Log-Linear Subpopulation Models with Known Support," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 88(3), pages 917-939, September.
    13. C. Glas & Anna Dagohoy, 2007. "A Person Fit Test For Irt Models For Polytomous Items," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 72(2), pages 159-180, June.
    14. Frick, Hannah & Strobl, Carolin & Leisch, Friedrich & Zeileis, Achim, 2012. "Flexible Rasch Mixture Models with Package psychomix," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 48(i07).
    15. Haruhiko Ogasawara, 2013. "Asymptotic properties of the Bayes modal estimators of item parameters in item response theory," Computational Statistics, Springer, vol. 28(6), pages 2559-2583, December.
    16. Cervantes, Víctor H., 2017. "DFIT: An R Package for Raju's Differential Functioning of Items and Tests Framework," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 76(i05).
    17. repec:jss:jstsof:20:i01 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. repec:jss:jstsof:39:i12 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Shrum, Trisha & Donovan, Christopher & Bloch, Sadie & Cripps, Emma & Boyson, Ceclia, 2024. "The REBL Score: A dynamic measure of pro-environmental behavior," OSF Preprints w92se, Center for Open Science.
    20. Piero Veronese & Eugenio Melilli, 2021. "Confidence Distribution for the Ability Parameter of the Rasch Model," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 86(1), pages 131-166, March.
    21. Timo Bechger & Gunter Maris, 2015. "A Statistical Test for Differential Item Pair Functioning," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 80(2), pages 317-340, June.
    22. repec:jss:jstsof:36:c01 is not listed on IDEAS
    23. repec:jss:jstsof:20:i06 is not listed on IDEAS
    24. Clemens Draxler, 2018. "Bayesian conditional inference for Rasch models," AStA Advances in Statistical Analysis, Springer;German Statistical Society, vol. 102(2), pages 245-262, April.
    25. Ivo Poncny, 2000. "Exact person fit indexes for the rasch model for arbitrary alternatives," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 65(1), pages 29-42, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:5:y:2015:i:2:p:2158244015588958. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.