In this study, we examined the results and interpretations produced from two different IRTree models—one using paths consisting of only dichotomous decisions, and one using paths consisting of both dichotomous and polytomous decisions. We used data from two versions of an impulsivity measure. In the first version, all the response options had labels; in the second version, only the endpoints were labeled. Based on past research, we hypothesized that the endpoints would be selected more frequently in the endpoint-only labeled condition, and the midpoint response option would be selected more frequently in the fully labeled condition. Results from the two models (dichotomous and polytomous) were similar and indicated that our hypotheses were partially supported—specifically, there was no consistent pattern in terms of which condition saw a higher frequency of midpoint response selection. However, our hypotheses regarding extreme responding in the endpoint-only labeling condition were supported.

中文翻译：

---

看到森林和树木：比较两个 IRTree 模型以研究完全与仅端点响应选项标记的影响

在这项研究中，我们检查了两种不同 IRTree 模型产生的结果和解释——一种使用仅由二分决策组成的路径，另一种使用由二分决策和多分决策组成的路径。我们使用了来自两个版本的冲动性测量的数据。在第一个版本中，所有响应选项都有标签；在第二个版本中，只有端点被标记。根据过去的研究，我们假设在仅端点标记条件下会更频繁地选择端点，而在完全标记条件下会更频繁地选择中点响应选项。两种模型（二分法和多分法）的结果相似，表明我们的假设得到了部分支持——特别是，在哪种情况下中点响应选择的频率更高方面没有一致的模式。然而，我们关于仅端点标记条件下的极端响应的假设得到了支持。