criteria for good items

[maxheld83]

• Items should be statements on which reasonable people can disagree.
  An item that is formulated in a skewed fashion, or otherwise unlikely to illicit differential responses is a waste of participants time, because it cannot create any (co)variance.
• Items should not be falsifiable, in the broadest sense.
  Items which depend on factual contexts, are, or will in the future become falsifiable are not great items.
  An ipsative measurement of such statements does not make much sense, and it is also not suited to capture subjectivity.
  Good items are often about axiological or ontological foundations.
• Items should be truthful (in terms of @Habermas1988a), and should strive to meet a discourse ethics of communicative action.
  Items which merely replicate popular "discourse" -- that is, narrowly, speech distorted by power -- are not appropriate.
• Items may be remedial.
  For some statements, it may be necessary to briefly explain concepts, which participants may be otherwise unfamiliar with.
  Participants may still sort some items as meaningless (in the relative middle of the distribution), but everyone should be able to comprehend every item.