Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(5)
Only 19 items (16 %), which had item discrimination below.20 did not discriminate their proficiency.
Most survey questions had item non-response of around 14%.
Analysis of item difficulties identified 15 items, which all had item difficulties < .15, i.e. they were very easy to agree with.
The questionnaires we analyzed either had item concepts which were too broad or covered larger problems such as the ability to stay awake during a task.
For example, risk of complications and what to do if side effects were experienced had item discrimination scores of 0.89, indicating that satisfaction with these items was a good indicator of high overall satisfaction.
Similar(55)
We had items with 40 or 50 bidders.
All items had item-total correlation > 0.20.
The items of the mental component had item-rest correlations.40 ≤ r ≤ .62.62
The items of the physical component had item-rest correlations.77 ≤ r ≤ .85.85
Six of the 20 items had item-total correlations lower than 0.2 (see Table 2).
All other items had item-factor loading between 0.41 and 0.88, explaining 16%77%% of the variance by the factor.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com