Print APA narrative text with preserved line breaks
Usage
# S3 method for class 'mfrm_apa_text'
print(x, ...)Details
Prints APA narrative text with preserved paragraph breaks using cat().
This is preferred over bare print() when you want readable multi-line
report output in the console.
Interpreting output
The printed text is the same content stored in
build_apa_outputs(...)$report_text, but with explicit paragraph breaks.
Typical workflow
Generate
apa <- build_apa_outputs(...).Print readable narrative with
apa$report_text.Use
summary(apa)to check completeness before manuscript use.
Examples
# \donttest{
toy <- load_mfrmr_data("example_core")
fit <- fit_mfrm(toy, "Person", c("Rater", "Criterion"), "Score", method = "JML", maxit = 300)
diag <- diagnose_mfrm(fit, residual_pca = "none")
apa <- build_apa_outputs(fit, diag)
apa$report_text
#> Method.
#>
#> Design and data.
#> A many-facet rating-scale Rasch model was fit to 768 observations from 48 persons scored on
#> a 4-category scale (1-4). The design included facets for Rater (n = 4), Criterion (n = 4).
#> Facet-level sample sizes were strong (smallest level N = 192), though facets were still
#> estimated as fixed effects with sum-to-zero identification;
#> `analyze_hierarchical_structure()` is available for nesting and variance-component
#> follow-up.
#>
#> Estimation settings.
#> The RSM specification was estimated using JML with mfrmr. Precision summaries were
#> exploratory in this run. Recommended use for this precision profile: JML standard errors
#> and normal bands are exploratory approximations. Changing to MML does not by itself
#> establish valid uncertainty; review the fitted model and its uncertainty assumptions..
#> Optimization met the numerical convergence checks after 203 function evaluations and 53
#> gradient evaluations (LogLik = -820.949). MML model-comparison criteria are unavailable for
#> this fit; numerical completion alone does not establish comparability. Legacy descriptive
#> AIC = 1753.898; legacy descriptive BIC = 2013.950; neither enters the common MML ranking
#> panel. Terminal gradient sup-norm = 0.0001 (review threshold = 0.0001). Constraint
#> settings: noncenter facet = Person; anchored levels = 0 (facets: none); group anchors = 0
#> (facets: none); dummy facets = none.
#>
#> Results.
#>
#> Scale functioning.
#> Category counts were available for all 4 categories: 0 unused and 0 below 10. Counts alone
#> do not establish category adequacy. Adjacent threshold comparisons: 0 decreasing among 2
#> available; 0 of 2 comparisons unavailable. Available estimates range from -1.32 to 1.38
#> logits. Adjacent threshold comparisons: 0 decreasing among 2 available; 0 of 2 comparisons
#> unavailable.
#>
#> Facet measures.
#> Person measures ranged from -2.18 to 2.68 logits (M = 0.00, SD = 1.10). Rater measures
#> ranged from -0.33 to 0.33 logits (M = 0.00, SD = 0.31). Criterion measures ranged from
#> -0.42 to 0.25 logits (M = 0.00, SD = 0.29).
#>
#> Fit and precision.
#> Overall mean-square fit was within the 0.5-1.5 screening band (infit MnSq = 0.99, outfit
#> MnSq = 1.02). This band is the package's review convention; published mean-square
#> guidelines differ, and band position is screening evidence rather than a model-validity
#> decision. MnSq outside [0.5, 1.5]: 1 of 56 classified elements flagged; 0 of 56 elements
#> unclassified. Largest misfit signals among 56 elements with complete paired statistics:
#> Person:P023 (|ZSTD| = 3.06); Person:P018 (|ZSTD| = 1.51); Criterion:Organization (|ZSTD| =
#> 1.43). Criterion exploratory reliability summary = 0.89 (separation = 2.78). Person
#> exploratory reliability summary = 0.90 (separation = 3.01). Rater exploratory reliability
#> summary = 0.90 (separation = 3.05). These are Rasch/FACETS-style separation indices
#> (measure spread relative to measurement error), not inter-rater agreement. Observed
#> inter-rater agreement is reported separately from separation reliability: for Rater, exact
#> agreement = 0.36, expected exact agreement = 0.37, adjacent agreement = 0.83. Element-level
#> 95% approximate intervals (Normal approximation) accompany 56 of 56 estimates; 0 of 56
#> estimates have intervals eligible for primary reporting.
#>
#> Reporting cautions.
#> Precision note: this run relies on exploratory precision summaries, so confidence intervals
#> and reliability summaries should not be treated as formal inferential quantities.
# }