Modeling item-level data with item response theory

Current Directions in Psychological Science

Volumn 7, Issue 4, 1998, Pages 104-109

  Zickar, Michael J ^a  

^a BOWLING GREEN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0032129148     PISSN: 09637214     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/1467-8721.ep10774739     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Bock, R.D. (1972). Estimating item parameters and latent ability when responses are scored in two or more nominal categories. Psychometrika, 37, 29-51.
2. Drasgow, F., & Parsons, C.K. (1983). Application of unidimensional item response theory models to multidimensional data. Applied Psychological Measurement, 7, 189-199.
3. Hambleton, R.K., & Jones, R.W. (1993). Comparison of classical test theory and item response theory and their applications to test development. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 22, 38-47.
4. Kelderman, H. (1997). Loglinear multidimensional item response model for polytomously scored items. In W.J. van der Linden & R.K. Hambleton (Eds.), Handbook of modern item response theory (pp. 287-304). New York: Springer-Verlag.
5. Kirisci, L., Tarter, R.E., & Hsu, T. (1994). Fitting a two-parameter logistic item response model to clarify the psychometric properties of the drug use screening inventory for adolescent alcohol and drug abusers. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 18, 1335-1341.
6. Levine, M.V., & Rubin, D.B. (1979). Measuring the appropriateness of multiple-choice test scores. Journal of Educational Statistics, 4, 269-290.
7. Levine, M.V., & Tsien, S. (1997). A geometric approach to two dimensional measurement. In A.J. Marley (Ed.), Choice, decision, and measurement (pp. 207-223). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
8. Reckase, M.D. (1997). The past and future of multidimensional item response theory. Applied Psychological Measurement, 21, 25-36.
9. Roskam, E.E. (1985). Current issues in item response theory. In E.E. Roskam (Ed.), Measurement and personality assessment (pp. 3-19). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.
10. Roskam, E.E. (1997). Models for speed and time-limit tests. In W.J. van der Linden & R.K. Hambleton (Eds.), Handbook of modern item response theory (pp. 187-208). New York: Springer-Verlag.
11. Roznowski, M. (1989). An examination of the measurement properties of the Job Descriptive Index with experimental items. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 805-814.
12. Samejima, F. (1969). Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores. Psychometrika, 34(Suppl. 17).
13. Thissen, D., & Steinberg, L. (1988). Data analysis using item response theory. Psychological Bulletin, 104, 385-395.
14. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the rationality of choice. Science, 221, 453-458.
15. Zickar, M.J., & Drasgow, F. (1996). Detecting faking on a personality instrument using appropriateness measurement. Applied Psychological Measurement, 20, 71-87.
16. Zickar, M.J., & Highhouse, S. (1998). Looking closer at the effects of framing on risky choice: An item response theory analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 75, 75-91.