Cited by 1,603Psychometric Methodologies and TestingMental Health Research TopicsStatistical Methods and Bayesian Inference

Why the items versus parcels controversy needn’t be one.

Open access
Little, Todd D., Rhemtulla, Mijke, Gibson, Kimberly, Schoemann, Alexander M.·2013·Psychological Methods

Abstract

The use of item parcels has been a matter of debate since the earliest use of factor analysis and structural equation modeling. Here, we review the arguments that have been levied both for and against the use of parcels and discuss the relevance of these arguments in light of the building body of empirical evidence investigating their performance. We discuss the many advantages of parcels that some researchers find attractive and highlight, too, the potential problems that ill-informed use can incur. We argue that no absolute pro or con stance is warranted. Parcels are an analytic tool like any other. There are circumstances in which parceling is useful and those when it is not. We emphasize the precautions that should be taken when creating item parcels and interpreting model results based on parcels. Finally, we review and compare several proposed strategies for parcel building and suggest directions for further research.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/a0033266

Cites

48 of 48 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Different methods of parcelling exist and each have benefits and drawbacks.

    “Different methods of parcelling exist and each have benefits and drawbacks”

    From Psychometric properties of acceptance measures: A systematic review (2019) · cites this paper as Little, Rhemtulla, Gibson, & Schoemann, 2013

  • In scale development, parcelling might hide true relationships amongst scale items.

    “especially in scale development where true relationships amongst scale items might be hidden (Little, Rhemtulla, Gibson, & Schoemann, 2013; Worthington & Whittaker, 2006).”

    From Psychometric properties of acceptance measures: A systematic review (2019) · cites this paper as Little, Rhemtulla, Gibson, & Schoemann, 2013

  • Parcelling is the source of much debate.

    “Parcelling, an approach whereby items are combined together into parcels, is the source of much debate.”

    From Psychometric properties of acceptance measures: A systematic review (2019) · cites this paper as Little, Rhemtulla, Gibson, & Schoemann, 2013

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Gibson KA 2012 Covariance algebra of parcels Unpublished masters thesis Available at: www.crmda.ku.edu
  2. Nunnally JC 1978 Psychometric theory 2 New York, NY McGraw-Hill

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Little, T. D., Rhemtulla, M., Gibson, K., & Schoemann, A. M.
Affiliations
University of Kansas (US)
Venue
Psychological Methods
Published
2013
Volume
18
Issue
3
Pages
285-300
ISSN
  • 1082-989X (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1463
OpenAlex
W2097789390
Cited by
1,603
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 144 · 2025: 177 · 2024: 140 · 2023: 140 · 2022: 156 · 2021: 184 · 2020: 139 · 2019: 136 · 2018: 105 · 2017: 102 · 2016: 67 · 2015: 58 · 2014: 41 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 4
FWCI
79.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
other-oa
Locations
  • Psychological Methods (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (NSF1053160)
  • Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
  • University of Kansas
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Mental Health Research Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
Keywords
parceling, factor analysis, structural equation modeling
MeSH terms
Factor Analysis, Statistical, Humans, Psychometrics, Statistics as Topic

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review