{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.021246458923512748, 'fraction_numerical': 0.007082152974504249, 'mean_word_length': 4.991525423728813, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Corrigendum: Applying Item Response Trees to Personality Data in the Selection Context

One of the pseudoitems for the agree primary process (APP) model was coded incorrectly. The second pseudoitem should have been coded as 1 for extreme responses and 0 for all other responses. In the original paper, neutral responses were coded as missing instead of 0. The incorrect coding violated the tree’s branching structure by not making endorsing neutral responses conditional on the appropriate node (not providing an extreme response). This artificially increased the fit of the model. In addition, the formula in Table 1 for Response Category 3 under the APP model was also incorrect. The formula should read: