Simplifying the implementation of modern scale scoring methods with an automated R package: Automated moderated...

When generating scores to represent latent constructs, analysts have a choice between applying psychometric approaches that are principled but that can be complicated and time-intensive versus applying simple and fast, but less precise approaches, such as sum or mean scoring. We explain the reasons for preferring modern psychometric approaches: namely, use of unequal item weights and severity parameters, the ability to account for local dependence and differential item functioning, and the use of covariate information to more efficiently estimate factor scores. We describe moderated nonlinear factor analysis (MNLFA), a relatively new, highly flexible approach that allows analysts to develop precise factor score estimates that address limitations of sum score, mean score, and traditional factor analytic approaches to scoring. We then outline the steps involved in using the MNLFA scoring approach and discuss the circumstances in which this approach is preferred. To overcome the difficulty of implementing MNLFA models in practice, we developed an R package, aMNLFA, that automates much of the rule-based scoring process. We illustrate the use of aMNLFA with an empirical example of scoring alcohol involvement in a longitudinal study of 6998 adolescents and compare performance of MNLFA scores with traditional factor analysis and sum scores based on the same set of 12 items. MNLFA scores retain more meaningful variation than other approaches. We conclude with practical guidelines for scoring.