English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Response styles introduce construct-irrelevant variance as a result of respondents systematically responding to Likert-type items regardless of content. Methods to account for response styles through data analysis as well as approaches to mitigating the effects of response styles during data collection have been well-documented. Recent approaches to modeling Likert responses, such as the IRTree model, rely on the response process individuals take when answering item responses. In this study, we advocate for the use of IRTrees to analyze Likert items in addition to using the hypothesized response process to design new items. Combining these two approaches facilitates answering Likert item design questions that have plagued researchers. These include the interpretation of a middle response option, the optimal number of response options, and how to label the response options. We present 7 research questions that could be answered using this new approach, outline methods of data collection and analysis for each, and present results from an empirical example to address one of these seven questions.

Accounting for Response Styles: Leveraging the Benefits of Combining Response Process Data Collection and Response Process Analysis Methods