Literature DB >> 29882541

Comparing the Two- and Three-Parameter Logistic Models via Likelihood Ratio Tests: A Commonly Misunderstood Problem.

Christy Brown1, Jonathan Templin2, Allan Cohen3.   

Abstract

Selection of an appropriate item response model is critical in the measurement of latent examinee ability. The one-, two-, and three-parameter logistic (1PL, 2PL, and 3PL) models are nested, and as such can be compared using likelihood ratio (LR) tests. The null hypothesis in the LR test for selection among the 2PL and 3PL models sets the guessing parameters to their lower bound of 0. This violates one of the assumptions of the LR test and renders the usual χ2 reference distribution inappropriate for the comparison. A review of the current literature revealed that this problem is not well understood in the educational measurement field. Ignoring this issue can lead to selection of an overly simplified model, with implications for the ability estimates. In this article, the use of the LR test for item response model selection is investigated, with the goal of providing practitioners with an appropriate method of selecting the most parsimonious model. The results of simulation studies indicate the nature of the problem, with inaccurate Type I error rates for cases where the inappropriate null distribution was used. An analysis of data from a statewide mathematics test showed differences pertinent to subsequent analyses.

Keywords:  boundary issue; item response theory; likelihood ratio test; model selection

Year:  2014        PMID: 29882541      PMCID: PMC5978598          DOI: 10.1177/0146621614563326

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Appl Psychol Meas        ISSN: 0146-6216


  4 in total

1.  How many IRT parameters does it take to model psychopathology items?

Authors:  Steven P Reise; Niels G Waller
Journal:  Psychol Methods       Date:  2003-06

2.  A Cautionary Note on Using G(2)(dif) to Assess Relative Model Fit in Categorical Data Analysis.

Authors:  Albert Maydeu-Olivares; Li Cai
Journal:  Multivariate Behav Res       Date:  2006-03-01       Impact factor: 5.923

3.  Applying item response theory (IRT) modeling to questionnaire development, evaluation, and refinement.

Authors:  Maria Orlando Edelen; Bryce B Reeve
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2007-03-21       Impact factor: 4.147

4.  Variance components testing in the longitudinal mixed effects model.

Authors:  D O Stram; J W Lee
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1994-12       Impact factor: 2.571

  4 in total
  2 in total

1.  Power Analysis for the Wald, LR, Score, and Gradient Tests in a Marginal Maximum Likelihood Framework: Applications in IRT.

Authors:  Felix Zimmer; Clemens Draxler; Rudolf Debelak
Journal:  Psychometrika       Date:  2022-08-27       Impact factor: 2.290

2.  Vision Parameters Most Important to Functionality in Glaucoma.

Authors:  Ahmed F Shakarchi; Aleksandra Mihailovic; Sheila K West; David S Friedman; Pradeep Y Ramulu
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2019-11-01       Impact factor: 4.799

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.