Literature DB >> 31105320

Imputation Methods to Deal With Missing Responses in Computerized Adaptive Multistage Testing.

Dee Duygu Cetin-Berber1, Halil Ibrahim Sari2, Anne Corinne Huggins-Manley1.   

Abstract

Routing examinees to modules based on their ability level is a very important aspect in computerized adaptive multistage testing. However, the presence of missing responses may complicate estimation of examinee ability, which may result in misrouting of individuals. Therefore, missing responses should be handled carefully. This study investigated multiple missing data methods in computerized adaptive multistage testing, including two imputation techniques, the use of full information maximum likelihood and the use of scoring missing data as incorrect. These methods were examined under the missing completely at random, missing at random, and missing not at random frameworks, as well as other testing conditions. Comparisons were made to baseline conditions where no missing data were present. The results showed that imputation and the full information maximum likelihood methods outperformed incorrect scoring methods in terms of average bias, average root mean square error, and correlation between estimated and true thetas.

Keywords:  Missing data; computerized adaptive multistage testing; imputation

Year:  2018        PMID: 31105320      PMCID: PMC6506986          DOI: 10.1177/0013164418805532

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Educ Psychol Meas        ISSN: 0013-1644            Impact factor:   2.821


  6 in total

1.  Simple imputation methods versus direct likelihood analysis for missing item scores in multilevel educational data.

Authors:  Damazo T Kadengye; Wilfried Cools; Eva Ceulemans; Wim Van den Noortgate
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2012-06

2.  Missing data methods for dealing with missing items in quality of life questionnaires. A comparison by simulation of personal mean score, full information maximum likelihood, multiple imputation, and hot deck techniques applied to the SF-36 in the French 2003 decennial health survey.

Authors:  Hugo Peyre; Alain Leplège; Joël Coste
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2010-10-01       Impact factor: 4.147

3.  Investigation and Treatment of Missing Item Scores in Test and Questionnaire Data.

Authors:  Klaas Sijtsma; L Andries van der Ark
Journal:  Multivariate Behav Res       Date:  2003-10-01       Impact factor: 5.923

4.  Modelling non-ignorable missing-data mechanisms with item response theory models.

Authors:  Rebecca Holman; Cees A W Glas
Journal:  Br J Math Stat Psychol       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 3.380

5.  Missing data in a multi-item instrument were best handled by multiple imputation at the item score level.

Authors:  Iris Eekhout; Henrica C W de Vet; Jos W R Twisk; Jaap P L Brand; Michiel R de Boer; Martijn W Heymans
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2013-12-02       Impact factor: 6.437

6.  The other half of the story: effect size analysis in quantitative research.

Authors:  Jessica Middlemis Maher; Jonathan C Markey; Diane Ebert-May
Journal:  CBE Life Sci Educ       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 3.325

  6 in total
  1 in total

1.  Estimating Probabilities of Passing for Examinees With Incomplete Data in Mastery Tests.

Authors:  Sandip Sinharay
Journal:  Educ Psychol Meas       Date:  2021-06-21       Impact factor: 3.088

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.