Correction: The robust estimation of examinee ability based on the four-parameter logistic model when guessing and carelessness responses exist.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0250268.].

The robust estimation of examinee ability based on the four-parameter logistic model when guessing and carelessness responses exist.

The three-parameter Logistic model (3PLM) and the four-parameter Logistic model (4PLM) have been proposed to reduce biases in cases of response disturbances, including random guessing and carelessness. However, they could also influence the examinees who do not guess or make careless errors. This paper proposes a new approach to solve this problem, which is a robust estimation based on the 4PLM (4PLM-Robust), involving a critical-probability guessing parameter and a carelessness parameter. This approach is compared with the 2PLM-MLE(two-parameter Logistic model and a maximum likelihood estimator), the 3PLM-MLE, the 4PLM-MLE, the Biweight estimation and the Huber estimation in terms of bias using an example and three simulation studies. The results show that the 4PLM-Robust is an effective method for robust estimation, and its calculation is simpler than the Biweight estimation and the Huber estimation.

Comparison of Trust Assessment Scales Based on Item Response Theory.

Three widely used interpersonal trust measurement scales [Interpersonal Trust Scale (ITS), Philosophies of Human Nature Scale (RPHNS), Company Trust Scale (CTS)] have seldom been applied in non-Western contexts. Different social environments may lead to variation in the level or structure of trust. Therefore, it is necessary to compare the applicability of these scales to different levels of trust-related traits in Eastern cultures so that researchers can choose appropriate scales for relevant studies. This study attempted to conduct a comparative analysis of the ITS, RPHNS, and CTS. A sample of 725 Chinese college students was analyzed. Total score correlations and latent factor correlations estimated by confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) for a first-order three-factor model were assessed, and then the quality of the item parameters, test reliability and standard errors, and test information were assessed. The results are as follows: (1) the ITS and the RPHNS assessed almost the same trust traits; therefore, only the ITS and the RPHNS are compared in the next sections; (2) the original structure of only the RPHNS is verified; (3) some items on the ITS do not work well, while the RPHNS has higher overall test reliability; and (4) the average item information provided by the RPHNS is higher across all trait levels. In most cases, the RPHNS is the better choice in the Chinese cultural context.