Literature DB >> 28426237

On the Complexity of Item Response Theory Models.

Wes Bonifay1, Li Cai2.   

Abstract

Complexity in item response theory (IRT) has traditionally been quantified by simply counting the number of freely estimated parameters in the model. However, complexity is also contingent upon the functional form of the model. We examined four popular IRT models-exploratory factor analytic, bifactor, DINA, and DINO-with different functional forms but the same number of free parameters. In comparison, a simpler (unidimensional 3PL) model was specified such that it had 1 more parameter than the previous models. All models were then evaluated according to the minimum description length principle. Specifically, each model was fit to 1,000 data sets that were randomly and uniformly sampled from the complete data space and then assessed using global and item-level fit and diagnostic measures. The findings revealed that the factor analytic and bifactor models possess a strong tendency to fit any possible data. The unidimensional 3PL model displayed minimal fitting propensity, despite the fact that it included an additional free parameter. The DINA and DINO models did not demonstrate a proclivity to fit any possible data, but they did fit well to distinct data patterns. Applied researchers and psychometricians should therefore consider functional form-and not goodness-of-fit alone-when selecting an IRT model.

Keywords:  Bifactor model; diagnostic classification model; item response theory; minimum description length; model evaluation

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28426237     DOI: 10.1080/00273171.2017.1309262

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Multivariate Behav Res        ISSN: 0027-3171            Impact factor:   5.923


  12 in total

1.  Psychometric Properties of the SCARED in a Nationally Representative U.S. Sample of 5-12-Year-Olds.

Authors:  Stefanie L Sequeira; Jennifer S Silk; William C Woods; David J Kolko; Oliver Lindhiem
Journal:  J Clin Child Adolesc Psychol       Date:  2019-05-28

2.  Individual differences in object recognition.

Authors:  Jennifer J Richler; Andrew J Tomarken; Mackenzie A Sunday; Timothy J Vickery; Kaitlin F Ryan; R Jackie Floyd; David Sheinberg; Alan C-N Wong; Isabel Gauthier
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2019-03       Impact factor: 8.934

3.  Building theories on top of, and not independent of, statistical models: The case of the p-factor.

Authors:  Ashley L Watts; Sean P Lane; Wes Bonifay; Douglas Steinley; Francisco A C Meyer
Journal:  Psychol Inq       Date:  2021-01-07

4.  Incomplete Tests of Conditional Association for the Assessment of Model Assumptions.

Authors:  Rudy Ligtvoet
Journal:  Psychometrika       Date:  2022-02-05       Impact factor: 2.500

5.  Parsimonious asymmetric item response theory modeling with the complementary log-log link.

Authors:  Hyejin Shim; Wes Bonifay; Wolfgang Wiedermann
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2022-03-30

6.  On the Choice of the Item Response Model for Scaling PISA Data: Model Selection Based on Information Criteria and Quantifying Model Uncertainty.

Authors:  Alexander Robitzsch
Journal:  Entropy (Basel)       Date:  2022-05-27       Impact factor: 2.738

7.  Noncompensatory MIRT For Passage-Based Tests.

Authors:  Nana Kim; Daniel M Bolt; James Wollack
Journal:  Psychometrika       Date:  2022-01-21       Impact factor: 2.290

8.  Seeking certainty about Intolerance of Uncertainty: Addressing old and new issues through the Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale-Revised.

Authors:  Gioia Bottesi; Stefano Noventa; Mark H Freeston; Marta Ghisi
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-02-11       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Heritability of overlapping impulsivity and compulsivity dimensional phenotypes.

Authors:  Jeggan Tiego; Samuel R Chamberlain; Ben J Harrison; Andrew Dawson; Lucy Albertella; George J Youssef; Leonardo F Fontenelle; Murat Yücel
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-09-01       Impact factor: 4.379

10.  Deriving an overall appearance domain score by applying bifactor IRT analysis to the BODY-Q appearance scales.

Authors:  Daan Geerards; Lisa van den Berg; Andrea L Pusic; Maarten M Hoogbergen; Anne F Klassen; René R W J van der Hulst; Chris J Sidey-Gibbons
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2019-11-22       Impact factor: 4.147

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.