Development and validation of the general regulatory focus measure forced choice scale (GRFM-FC)

• Published in: Current psychology (New Brunswick, N.J.) N.J.), 2024-07, Vol.43 (25), p.21646-21657
• Main Authors: Chammas, Cristiane Benedetti, da Costa Hernandez, José Mauro
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adaptation; Behavioral Science and Psychology; Classical test theory; Emotions; Item response theory; Psychology; Questionnaires; Response rates; Social Sciences; Validity
• ISSN: 1046-1310; 1936-4733
• DOI: 10.1007/s12144-024-05970-1

The Regulatory Focus Theory is an important theory in the fields of social and human sciences that explains how people pursue their goals. However, despite its importance, a consensus on the optimal scale for assessing individual regulatory focus remains inconclusive. The comparisons of the two primary scales used in studies, the Regulatory Focus Questionnaire (RFQ) and the General Regulatory Focus Measure (GRFM), have shown a lack of consensus. Considering the importance of the Regulatory Focus Theory, the widespread use of the GRFM scale, and the advantages of the forced-choice format over the ranking format, this article aims to propose and validate an adaptation of the GRFM scale to the forced-choice format (GRFM-FC) using Item Response Theory (IRT) analysis. Because the GRFM scale is usually included in studies along with other scales and measures, a scale with fewer items, such as the GRFM-FC, can facilitate and broaden its use by saving time and effort, increasing the response rate of surveys, and reducing respondent biases, such as leniency and severity, central tendency, and social desirability. The new GRFM-FC is more efficient than the GRFM to differentiate between the two types of regulatory focus, contributing to its predictive validity. In addition to solving the problem of ipsative data, IRT analysis provides a more precise informational capacity for each scale item than the Classical Test Theory.