
Youth Teasing and Bullying are a major
public health problem
 ~20% of youths report being bullied or bullying at
school in a given year
 160,000 on any given day
 Significant psychological and physical sequelae
Healthy People 2020 Objective – reduce
bullying among adolescents
 State legislation requiring teasing and
bullying interventions

Dynamic social interactions comprised of
a set of verbal and/or non-verbal
behaviors that occur among peers and
that is humorous and playful on one level
but may be annoying to the target child
on another level.
Repetitive persistent patterns of
conduct by one or more children
that deliberately inflict physical,
verbal, or emotional abuse on
another child and where a real or
perceived power differential is in
place.
Mean-spirited bullying
that is poorly received;
Objective bullying
Good-natured teasing that
is poorly received;
Chronic teasing/
Subjective bullying
Mean-spirited bullying that
is well received;
Builds resiliency to bullying
Good-natured teasing
that is well received
Goal: to allow for a safe acquirement
and reproducibility of measuring
characteristics
 Analysis of data should reflect reality
rather than just the numbers


CTT: has the test (not the item) as its basis
› Although the statistics generated are often
generalized to similar students taking a similar
test; they only really apply to those students
taking that test

Latent trait models: aim to look beyond that
at the underlying traits which are producing
the test performance
› They are measured at item level and provide
sample-free measurement
Items Analysis
Latent Trait
Models
Classical Test
Theory
Item Response
Theory
1P
Rasch Models
4P
2P
3P

To demonstrate the relationship between
item difficulty and person ability
› The latent variable is conceptualized as
existing along a continuum
› Items can be hierarchically ordered along
the continuum

The score provides information regarding
what it means to be at a specific place
on the continuum

Final instrument: 32 items and 4 domains
# of
ITEMS
EXTRACTED
VARIANCE
Personality & Behavior
13
18.4%
Family & Environment
8
12.4%
School-related
9
11.8%
Body Size
2
8.6%
DOMAIN
CRONBACH’S
ALPHA
.89
.84
.85
.82

To evaluate the degree to which the
CATS items have been developed in
accordance with the assumptions of the
Rasch measurement model


Methodological study design
It was hypothesized that teasing/bullying,
as measured by the CATS items, are:
› unidimensional in nature
› follows a hierarchical order in the way that the
items define the variable
› a continuum along which the CATS items can be
ordered and people experiencing
› various levels of teasing/bullying can be placed


Secondary data analysis
Sample: 666 children aged 11-15 years
Each CATS subscale evaluated
independently
 Winsteps v. 3.69.0 for Rasch analyses
 Rasch Rating Scale Model:


Person & Item Separation Statistics
› Hierarchical Order

Analysis of Fit
› Fit to Ideal Rasch Model

Principal Components Analysis of Rasch
Residuals
› Dimensionality

Variable Maps
› Hierarchical Order
› Continuum

The current CATS subscales were not
uni-dimensional, did not strictly follow
hierarchical order, and did not stretch
along the entire continuum
Unidimensionality?
Hierarchial
Ordering?
Covers
Continuum?
Fit to Rasch?
Personality &
Behavior
No
No
No
3 underfits
3 overfits
Family &
Environment
No
No
No
School-related
No
No
No
Yew
No
No
DOMAIN
Body Size
2 overfits
2 overfits
Good fit
1
0
-1
-2
PERSON - MAP - ITEM
<more>|<rare>
+
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
T|
|
|
. |
. |
. |T Who I live with
My jewelry/chains
# |S Way I dress My money Brand of shoes I wear What my family is like Being a nerd My schoolwork My parents
.# +M Grades Talking Friends Act weird/diff. Not know answers How talk Trouble Gay Chicken How do school Stuff
.#### |S Smart I am Way I act Not good at sports Not being popular Music I listen to
######### S|T Way I look My body shape My weight
.######## |
######### |
.########### |
############# |
.######## |
######## |
.##### |
.##### |
.###### |
####### M|
.## |
###### |
.## +
.#### |
|
.####### |
#### |
|
.###### S|
|
|
.###### |
|
|
|
|
.##### |
+
T|
|
|
|
|
|
. |
.######## |
|
|
|
.############ +
<less>|<frequ>
"#" IS 4. EACH "." IS 1 TO 3
Be dork/loser
Shy/quiet
Weird/diff friends
Sports
Domain
Personality & Behavior
Family & Environment
School-related
-3
EACH
Body size
1
0
-1
Mean-spirited bullying
that is poorly received;
Objective bullying
PERSON - MAP - ITEM
<more>|<rare>
+
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
T|
|
|
. |
. |
. |T Who I live with
My jewelry/chains
# |S Way I dress My money Brand of shoes I wear What my family is like Being a nerd My schoolwork My parents
.# +M Grades Talking Friends Act weird/diff. Not know answers How talk Trouble Gay Chicken How do school Stuff
.#### |S Smart I am Way I act Not good at sports Not being popular Music I listen to
######### S|T Way I look My body shape My weight
.######## |
######### |
.########### |
############# |
.######## |
######## |
.##### |
.##### |
.###### |
####### M|
.## |
###### |
.## +
.#### |
|
.####### |
#### |
|
.###### S|
|
|
.###### |
|
|
|
|
.##### |
+
T|
|
|
|
|
|
. |
.######## |
|
|
|
.############ +
<less>|<frequ>
"#" IS 4. EACH "." IS 1 TO 3
Be dork/loser
Good-natured teasing that
is poorly received;
Chronic teasing/
Subjective bullying
Mean-spirited bullying that
is well received;
Builds resiliency to bullying
-2
-3
EACH
Good-natured teasing
that is well received
Shy/quiet
Weird/diff friends
Sports
The divergent results between the CTT
and Rasch analyses, while not
completely surprising, underscore the
need for continued refinement of an
instrument’s psychometric properties to
ensure that is measuring the concept of
interest in the way that it was intended.
Reference:
Vessey, J. A., DiFazio, R. L., & Strout, T. D. (2012). Increasing meaning in
measurement: A Rasch analysis of the CATS. Nursing Research, 69, 159170.