Literature DB >> 27230079

Consistency of Cluster Analysis for Cognitive Diagnosis: The Reduced Reparameterized Unified Model and the General Diagnostic Model.

Chia-Yi Chiu1, Hans-Friedrich Köhn2.   

Abstract

The asymptotic classification theory of cognitive diagnosis (ACTCD) provided the theoretical foundation for using clustering methods that do not rely on a parametric statistical model for assigning examinees to proficiency classes. Like general diagnostic classification models, clustering methods can be useful in situations where the true diagnostic classification model (DCM) underlying the data is unknown and possibly misspecified, or the items of a test conform to a mix of multiple DCMs. Clustering methods can also be an option when fitting advanced and complex DCMs encounters computational difficulties. These can range from the use of excessive CPU times to plain computational infeasibility. However, the propositions of the ACTCD have only been proven for the Deterministic Input Noisy Output "AND" gate (DINA) model and the Deterministic Input Noisy Output "OR" gate (DINO) model. For other DCMs, there does not exist a theoretical justification to use clustering for assigning examinees to proficiency classes. But if clustering is to be used legitimately, then the ACTCD must cover a larger number of DCMs than just the DINA model and the DINO model. Thus, the purpose of this article is to prove the theoretical propositions of the ACTCD for two other important DCMs, the Reduced Reparameterized Unified Model and the General Diagnostic Model.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Reduced Reparameterized Unified Model (Reduced RUM); cluster analysis; cognitive diagnosis; consistency; diagnostic classification model; general diagnostic classification models; general diagnostic model (GDM)

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27230079     DOI: 10.1007/s11336-016-9499-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychometrika        ISSN: 0033-3123            Impact factor:   2.500


  8 in total

1.  Properties of the Hubert-Arabie adjusted Rand index.

Authors:  Douglas Steinley
Journal:  Psychol Methods       Date:  2004-09

2.  Measurement of psychological disorders using cognitive diagnosis models.

Authors:  Jonathan L Templin; Robert A Henson
Journal:  Psychol Methods       Date:  2006-09

3.  A general diagnostic model applied to language testing data.

Authors:  Matthias von Davier
Journal:  Br J Math Stat Psychol       Date:  2007-03-22       Impact factor: 3.380

4.  The BUGS project: Evolution, critique and future directions.

Authors:  David Lunn; David Spiegelhalter; Andrew Thomas; Nicky Best
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2009-11-10       Impact factor: 2.373

5.  The Reduced RUM as a Logit Model: Parameterization and Constraints.

Authors:  Chia-Yi Chiu; Hans-Friedrich Köhn
Journal:  Psychometrika       Date:  2015-04-03       Impact factor: 2.500

6.  The DINA model as a constrained general diagnostic model: Two variants of a model equivalency.

Authors:  Matthias von Davier
Journal:  Br J Math Stat Psychol       Date:  2013-01-08       Impact factor: 3.380

7.  Hierarchical diagnostic classification models: a family of models for estimating and testing attribute hierarchies.

Authors:  Jonathan Templin; Laine Bradshaw
Journal:  Psychometrika       Date:  2014-01-30       Impact factor: 2.500

8.  Hierarchical clustering schemes.

Authors:  S C Johnson
Journal:  Psychometrika       Date:  1967-09       Impact factor: 2.500

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.