Empirical Priors in Polytomous Computerized Adaptive Tests: Risks and Rewards in Clinical Settings

The use of empirical prior information about participants has been shown to substantially improve the efficiency of computerized adaptive tests (CATs) in educational settings. However, it is unclear how these results translate to clinical settings, where small item banks with highly informative polytomous items often lead to very short CATs. We explored the risks and rewards of using prior information in CAT in two simulation studies, rooted in applied clinical examples. In the first simulation, prior precision and bias in the prior location were manipulated independently. Our results show that a precise personalized prior can meaningfully increase CAT efficiency. However, this reward comes with the potential risk of overconfidence in wrong empirical information (i.e., using a precise severely biased prior), which can lead to unnecessarily long tests, or severely biased estimates. The latter risk can be mitigated by setting a minimum number of items that are to be administered during the CAT, or by setting a less precise prior; be it at the expense of canceling out any efficiency gains. The second simulation, with more realistic bias and precision combinations in the empirical prior, places the prevalence of the potential risks in context. With similar estimation bias, an empirical prior reduced CAT test length, compared to a standard normal prior, in 68% of cases, by a median of 20%; while test length increased in only 3% of cases. The use of prior information in CAT seems to be a feasible and simple method to reduce test burden for patients and clinical practitioners alike.     

The Suicidal Narrative and Its Relationship to the Suicide Crisis Syndrome and Recent Suicidal Behavior

In this study, we introduce the construct of the suicidal narrative, a hypothetical personal narrative linked to imminent suicide, and explore its relationship to near‐term suicidal risk and the suicide crisis syndrome (SCS). Psychiatric outpatients (N = 289) were administered the Columbia Suicide‐Severity Rating Scale (C‐SSRS), Suicide Crisis Inventory (SCI), and Suicide Narrative Inventory (SNI), a novel instrument combining the documented risk factors of Thwarted Belongingness, Perceived Burdensomeness, Humiliation, Social Defeat, Goal Disengagement, and Goal Reengagement. Dimensional measures of past month, lifetime, and past suicidal phenomena, incorporating ideation and behavior, were calculated from the C‐SSRS. Structural equation modeling was used to explore the interaction among variables. Factor analysis of the SNI yielded two orthogonal factors, termed Interpersonal and Goal Orientation. The former factor was comprised of Perceived Burdensomeness, Social Defeat, Humiliation, and Thwarted Belongingness, the latter of Goal Disengagement and Goal Reengagement. The Interpersonal factor correlated with both SCS severity and suicidal phenomena in each time frame and the Goal Orientation factor with no other variable. As hypothesized, the proposed model was significant for the past month only. Our findings support the construct of the suicidal narrative and its function as a near‐term suicidal risk factor.     

Gender Differences in Anti-Gay Prejudice: Evidence for Stability and Change

Sex Roles - In recent years, there has been remarkable change in societal acceptance of lesbians and gay men. This meta-analysis explored whether this positive shift has reduced the gender...     

A Theoretical Framework for Analysing the Notion of Relative Importance of Criteria

Multiple-criteria decision aid almost always requires the use of weights, importance coefficients or even a hierarchy of criteria, veto thresholds, etc. These are importance parameters that are used to differentiate the role devoted to each criterion in the construction of comprehensive preferences. Many researchers have studied the problem of how to assign values to such parameters, but few of them have tried to analyse in detail what underlies the notion of importance of criteria and to give a clear formal definition of it. In this paper our purpose is to define a theoretical framework so as to analyse the notion of the importance of criteria under very general conditions. Within this framework it clearly appears that the importance of criteria is taken into account in very different ways in various aggregation procedures. This framework also allows us to shed new light on fundamental questions such as: Under what conditions is it possible to state that one criterion is more important than another? Are importance parameters of the various aggregation procedures dependent on or independent of the encoding of criteria? What are the links between the two concepts of the importance of criteria and the compensatoriness of preferences? This theoretical framework seems to us sufficiently general to ground further research in order to define theoretically valid elicitation methods for importance parameters.