Rating corporate groups a modelling experience

This paper aims to provide a model that allows BPI to measure the credit risk, through its rating scale, of the subsidiaries included in the corporate groups who are their clients. This model should be simple enough to be applied in practice, accurate, and must give consistent results in comparison to what have been the ratings given by the bank. The model proposed includes operational, strategic, and financial factors and ends up giving one of three results: no support, partial support, or full support from the holding to the subsidiary, and each of them translates in adjustments in each subsidiary’s credit rating. As it would be expectable, most of the subsidiaries should have the same credit rating of its parent company.

A comparison of functional behaviour assessment rating scales in a sample of children and youth with autism spectrum disorders

This study sought to compare the results of the Motivation Assessment Scale (MAS; Durand & Crimmins, 1988), Questions About Behavior Function Scale (QABF; Matson & Vollmer, 1996) and Functional Analysis Screening Tool (FAST; Iwata & Deleon, 1996), when completed by parent informants in a sample of children and youth with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) who display challenging behaviour. Results indicated that there was low agreement between the functional hypotheses derived from each of three measures. In addition, correlations between functionally analogous scales were substantially lower than expected, while correlations between non-analogous subscales were stronger than anticipated. As indicated by this study, clinicians choosing to use FBA questionnaires to assess behavioural function, may not obtain accurate functional hypotheses, potentially resulting in ineffective intervention plans. The current study underscores the caution that must be taken when asking parents to complete these questionnaires to determine the function(s) of challenging behaviour for children/youth with ASD.

Effects of credit rating change on risk-taking

This thesis investigates whether there are changes in risk-taking behavior following an upgrade or downgrade in credit ratings. Research on effects of rating changes on capital markets is well-documented but the literature on how rating changes may affect firm behavior is sparse. Following, a downgrade in credit rating, managers may increase risk-taking to improve their overall performance or reduce risk-taking following upgrades to ensure that their performance is assessed more on the basis of what they may deem success in the form of an upgrade. Using a sample of firms trading in the U.S from 1994-2013, we find evidence of change in risk-taking behavior. We use cross-sectional regressions and matching using propensity scores and Barber and Lyon (1997) methodology to measure changes in risk-taking and we do find evidence of changes in managerial risk-taking behavior. Furthermore, we find that the direction of change (increase or decrease) in some cases is dependent on the type of measure rather than the type of rating change.

Ranking by rating

Each item in a given collection is characterized by a set of possible performances. A (ranking) method is a function that assigns an ordering of the items to every performance profile. Ranking by Rating consists in evaluating each item’s performance by using an exogenous rating function, and ranking items according to their performance ratings. Any such method is separable: the ordering of two items does not depend on the performances of the remaining items. We prove that every separable method must be of the ranking-by-rating type if (i) the set of possible performances is the same for all items and the method is anonymous, or (ii) the set of performances of each item is ordered and the method is monotonic. When performances are m-dimensional vectors, a separable, continuous, anonymous, monotonic, and invariant method must rank items according to a weighted geometric mean of their performances along the m dimensions.

Psychometric Properties of the Inventário Dimensional Clínico da Personalidade (IDCP) using the Rating Scale Model

The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of the Dimensional Clinical Personality Inventory (DCPI) using Rasch-based person and item analysis. 1281 participants were recruited, between 18 and 90 years of age (M=26.64; SD=8.94), 431 men (33.6%) and 127 (9.9%) patients diagnosed with axis I disorders and/or axis II according to DSM-IV-TR. Results indicated the IDCP scales performed reasonably well, and the usefulness of the analyses presented, demonstrate the Rasch model’s applicability for clinical applications. Among the important tools offered by the Rasch model, we explore the use of the person-item map, which visually presents the intuitively understandable psychological construct along the dimensional scale of the instrument.

Analyzing data from a fuzzy rating scale-based questionnaire : a case study

Resumen tomado de la publicaci??n

How the listener's experience influences the rating of the intelligibility of hearing-impaired children's speech

This paper discusses the importance of listener experience as a factor when developing intelligibility measures for hearing impaired children.

The utility of social behavior rating scales for children who are deaf and hard of hearing

This independent study provides an overview of the social-emotional and theory of mind development of children birth through high school and evaluates the utility of social-emotional rating scales in the classroom for children who are deaf and hard of hearing.

Skill Rating by Bayesian Inference

Systems Engineering often involves computer modelling the behaviour of proposed systems and their components. Where a component is human, fallibility must be modelled by a stochastic agent. The identification of a model of decision-making over quantifiable options is investigated using the game-domain of Chess. Bayesian methods are used to infer the distribution of players’ skill levels from the moves they play rather than from their competitive results. The approach is used on large sets of games by players across a broad FIDE Elo range, and is in principle applicable to any scenario where high-value decisions are being made under pressure.

Borg's rating of perceived exertion scales: do the verbal anchors mean the same for different clinical groups?

Objective: To examine the interpretation of the verbal anchors used in the Borg rating of perceived exertion (RPE) scales in different clinical groups and a healthy control group. Design: Prospective experimental study. Setting: Rehabilitation center. Participants: Nineteen subjects with brain injury, 16 with chronic low back pain (CLBP), and 20 healthy controls. Interventions: Not applicable. Main Outcome Measures: Subjects used a visual analog scale (VAS) to rate their interpretation of the verbal anchors from the Borg RPE 6-20 and the newer 10-point category ratio scale. Results: All groups placed the verbal anchors in the order that they occur on the scales. There were significant within-group differences (P > .05) between VAS scores for 4 verbal anchors in the control group, 8 in the CLBP group, and 2 in the brain injury group. There was no significant difference in rating of each verbal anchor between the groups (P > .05). Conclusions: All subjects rated the verbal anchors in the order they occur on the scales, but there was less agreement in rating of each verbal anchor among subjects in the brain injury group. Clinicians should consider the possibility of small discrepancies in the meaning of the verbal anchors to subjects, particularly those recovering from brain injury, when they evaluate exercise perceptions.

Intrinsic chess rating

This paper develops and tests formulas for representing playing strength at chess by the quality of moves played, rather than by the results of games. Intrinsic quality is estimated via evaluations given by computer chess programs run to high depth, ideally so that their playing strength is sufficiently far ahead of the best human players as to be a `relatively omniscient' guide. Several formulas, each having intrinsic skill parameters s for `sensitivity' and c for `consistency', are argued theoretically and tested by regression on large sets of tournament games played by humans of varying strength as measured by the internationally standard Elo rating system. This establishes a correspondence between Elo rating and the parameters. A smooth correspondence is shown between statistical results and the century points on the Elo scale, and ratings are shown to have stayed quite constant over time. That is, there has been little or no `rating inflation'. The theory and empirical results are transferable to other rational-choice settings in which the alternatives have well-defined utilities, but in which complexity and bounded information constrain the perception of the utility values.