Toward an Integrative Psychometric Model of Emotions

Emotions are part and parcel of the human condition, but their nature is debated. Three broad classes of theories about the nature of emotions can be distinguished: affect-program theories, constructionist theories, and appraisal theories. Integrating these broad classes of theories into a unifying theory is challenging. An integrative psychometric model of emotions can inform such a theory because psychometric models are intertwined with theoretical perspectives about constructs. To identify an integrative psychometric model, we delineate properties of emotions stated by emotion theories and investigate whether psychometric models account for these properties. Specifically, an integrative psychometric model of emotions should allow (a) identifying distinct emotions (central in affect-program theories), (b) between- and within-person variations of emotions (central in constructionist theories), and (c) causal relationships between emotion components (central in appraisal theories). Evidence suggests that the popular reflective and formative latent variable models—in which emotions are conceptualized as unobservable causes or consequences of emotion components—cannot account for all properties. Conversely, a psychometric network model—in which emotions are conceptualized as systems of causally interacting emotion components—accounts for all properties. The psychometric network model thus constitutes an integrative psychometric model of emotions, facilitating progress toward a unifying theory.

Toward an Integrative Psychometric Model of Emotions

Emotions are part and parcel of the human condition, but their nature is debated. Three broad classes of theories about the nature of emotions can be distinguished: affect program theories, constructionist theories, and appraisal theories. Integrating them in a unifying theory is challenging. An integrative psychometric model of emotions can inform such a theory, because psychometric models are intertwined with theoretical perspectives about constructs. To identify an integrative psychometric model, we (a) delineate properties of emotions stated by emotion theories, and (b) investigate whether psychometric models account for these properties. Specifically, an integrative psychometric model of emotions should allow identifying distinct emotions (central in affect program theories), should allow between and within person variation of emotions (central in constructionist theories), and should allow causal relationships between emotion components (central in appraisal theories). Evidence suggests that the popular reflective and formative latent variable models—in which emotions are conceptualized as unobservable causes or consequences of emotion components—cannot account for all properties. Conversely, a psychometric network model—in which emotions are conceptualized as systems of causally interacting emotion components—accounts for all properties. The psychometric network model thus constitutes an integrative psychometric model of emotions, facilitating progress toward a unifying theory.

A Psychometric Model for Discrete-Option Multiple-Choice Items

Discrete-option multiple-choice (DOMC) items differ from traditional multiple-choice (MC) items in the sequential administration of response options (up to display of the correct option). DOMC can be appealing in computer-based test administrations due to its protection of item security and its potential to reduce testwiseness effects. A psychometric model for DOMC items that attends to the random positioning of key location across different administrations of the same item is proposed, a feature that has been shown to affect DOMC item difficulty. Using two empirical data sets having items administered in both DOMC and MC formats, the variability in key location effects across both items and persons is considered. The proposed model exploits the capacity of the DOMC format to isolate both (a) distinct sources of item difficulty (i.e., related to the identification of keyed responses versus the ruling out of distractor options) and (b) distinct person proficiencies related to the same two components. Practical implications in terms of the randomized process applied to schedule item key location in DOMC test administrations are considered.