Item format should not matter as long as the entire set of items is calibrated onto the same scale, whether through concurrent calibration or conversion linking approaches.  I often calibrate educational assessments that include a range of item types delivered on my platofrm: multiple choice, multiple response, drag and drop, scored short answer, and essay rubrics.  Or did I miss the point, and you are talking about something more along the lines of item isomorphs?

Hi Nathan, thank you for your answer. My aim is to evaluate which item format is the best/most informative as this is a crucial decision in the process of psychometric measurement development. In detail, we want to prove evidence, that so-called ability-items ("Are you able to wash your car?" - 5 ordinal response options) are more informative than performance-items ("Did you wash your car last week"  - yes/No) for measuring physical impaiment. I`ve already analyzed the data by grafical/descriptive illustrations. What I am interested in is, how other authors use to present comparable findings in their publications.

Some years ago, we did some analyses on the Beck Depression Inventory looking at the ordinality of the original wording of the response sets. We ended up with "corrected" (collapsed) categories for several items, meaning that a partial credit model was adequate to  the new (and varying) response set. You may look up the article here:

Frick, Ulrich, Jürgen Rehm, and Uta Thien. "On the Latent Structure of the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI): Using the „Somatic “Subscale to Evaluate a Clinical Trial." Applications of Latent Trait and Latent Class Models in the Social Sciences (1997).