The performance of DIMTEST when latent trait and item difficulty distributions differ

Applied Psychological Measurement

Volumn 24, Issue 1, 2000, Pages 82-94

  Seraphine, Anne E ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA   (United States)

Author keywords

DIMTEST; Essential unidimentionality; Expert judgment; Item difficulty; Item response theory, unidimentionality, multidimentionality; Unidimentionality

Indexed keywords

EID: 0034342680     PISSN: 01466216     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/01466216000241005     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Ackerman, T. A. (1988, April). An explanation of differential item functioning from a multidimensional perspective. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans.
2. Bock, R. K., Gibbons, R., & Muraki, E. (1988). Full information item factor analysis. Applied Psychological Measurement, 12, 261-280.
3. De Champlain, A. F. (1992). Assessing test dimensionality using two approximate chi-square statistics. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
4. De Champlain, A. F., & Gessaroli, M. E. (1991, April). Assessing dimensionality using an index based on nonlinear factor analysis. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Boston.
5. De Champlain, A. F., & Tang, K. L. (1993, April). The effect of non-normal ability distributions on the assessment of dimensionality. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Atlanta.
6. Drasgow, P., & Parsons, C. K. (1983). Applications of unidimensional item response theory models to multidimensional data. Applied Psychological Measurement, 7, 189-199.
7. Fraser, C. (1988). NOHARM II: A FORTRAN program for fitting unidimensional and multidimensional normal ogive models of latent trait theory. Armidale, New South Wales, Australia: Centre for Behavioural Studies, The University of New England.
8. Gessaroli, M. E., & De Champlain, A. F. (1996). Using an approximate chi-square statistic to test the number of dimensions underlying the responses to a set of items. Journal of Educational Measurement, 33, 157-179.
9. Goldstein, H. (1980). Dimensionality, bias, independence, and measurement scale problems in latent trait score models. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 33, 234-246.
10. Hambleton, R. K., & Rovinelli, R. J. (1986). Assessing the dimensionality of a set of items. Applied Psychological Measurement, 10, 287-302.
11. Hambleton, R. K., & Swaminathan, H. (1985). Item response theory. Boston: Kluwer-Nijhoff.
12. Harrison, D. A. (1986). Robustness of IRT parameter estimation to violations of the unidimensionality assumption. Journal of Educational Statistics, 11, 91-115.
13. Hattie, J. (1984). An empirical study of various indices for determining unidimensionality. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 19, 49-78.
14. Hattie, J. (1985). Methodology review: Assessing unidimensionality of tests and items. Applied Psychological Measurement, 9, 139-164.
15. Hattie, J., Krakowski, K., Rogers, H. J., & Swaminathan, H. (1996). An assessment of Stout's index of essential unidimensionality. Applied Psychological Measurement, 20, 1-14.
16. Holland, P. W., & Rosenbaum, P. R. (1986). Conditional association and unidimensionality in monotone latent variable models. Annals of Statistics, 14, 1523-1543.
17. Humphreys, L. G. (1985). General intelligence: An integration of factor, trait, and simplex theory. In B. J. Wolman (Ed.), Handbook of intelligence: Theories, measurements, and applications (pp. 201-224). New York: Wiley.
18. Junker, B. W. (1991). Essential independence and likelihood-based ability estimation for polytomous items. Psychometrika, 56, 255-278.
19. Junker, B. W. (1993). Conditional association, essential independence and monotone unidimensional item response models. Annals of Statistics, 21, 1359-1378.
20. Lord, F. M., & Novick, M. R. (1968). Statistical theories of mental test scores. Reading MA: Addison-Wesley.
21. McDonald, R. D. (1967). Nonlinear factor analysis. Psychometric Monographs, No. 15, 32 (4, Pt. 2).
22. McDonald, R. D. (1981). Linear versus nonlinear models in item response theory. Applied Psychological Measurement, 6, 379-396.
23. Messick, S. (1995). Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from persons' responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. American Psychologist, 50, 741-749.
24. Muthén, B. (1984). A general structural equation model with dichotomous, ordered, and continuous latent variable indicators. Psychometrika, 49, 115-132.
25. Muthén, B. (1987). LISCOMP: Analysis of linear structural equations with a comprehensive measurement model [Computer program]. Mooresville IN: Scientific Software, Inc.
26. Nandakumar, R. (1994). Assessing the dimensionality of a set of item responses: Comparison of different approaches. Journal of Educational Measurement, 31, 17-35.
27. Nandakumar, R., & Stout, W. (1993). Refinements of Stout's procedure for assessing latent trait unidimensionality. Journal of Educational Statistics, 18, 41-68.
28. Nandakumar, R., & Yu, F. (1996). Empirical validation of DIMTEST on nonnormal ability distributions. Journal of Educational Measurement, 33, 355-368.
29. Reckase, M. D. (1979). Unifactor latent trait models applied to multifactor tests: Results and implications. Journal of Educational Statistics, 4, 207-230.
30. Reckase, M. D. (1985). The difficulty of test items that measure more than one ability. Applied Psychological Measurement, 9, 401-412.
31. Reckase, M. D., Ackerman, T. A., & Carlson, J. E. ( 1988). Building a unidimensional test using multidimensional items. Journal of Educational Measurement, 25, 193-203.
32. Reckase, M. D., & McKinley, R. L. (1991). The discriminating power of items that measure more than one dimension. Applied Psychological Measurement, 15, 361-373.
33. Rosenbaum, P. R. (1984). Testing the conditional independence and monotonic assumption of item response theory. Psychometrika, 49, 425-435.
34. Rosenbaum, P. R. (1988). Item bundles. Psychometrika, 53, 346-359.
35. Roznowski, M., Tucker, L. R., & Humphreys, L. G. (1991). Three approaches to determining the dimensionality of binary items. Applied Psychological Measurement, 15, 109-127.
36. Seraphine, A. E., Algina, J. J., & Miller, M. D. (April, 1995). Three procedures of unidimenstonality: A power study. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
37. Stout, W. F. (1987). A nonparametric approach for assessing latent trait unidimensionality. Psychometrika, 52, 589-617.
38. Stout, W. F. (1990). A new item response theory modeling approach with applications to unidimensional assessment and ability estimation. Psychometrika. 55, 293-326.
39. Stout, W. F., Nandakumar, R., Junker, B., Chang, H., & Steidinger, D. (1991). DIMTEST and TESTSIM [Computer program]. Urbana-Champaign: University of Illinois, Dept. of Statistics.
40. Traub, R. E. (1983). A priori considerations in choosing an item response model. In R. K. Hambleton (Ed.), Applications of item response theory (pp. 57-70). British Columbia: Educational Research Institution of British Columbia.
41. Wainer, H., & Kiely, G. L. (1987). Item clusters and computerized adaptive testing: A case for testlets. Journal of Educational Measurement, 24, 185-201.
42. Wainer, H., & Lewis, C. L. (1990). Psychometrics for testlets. Journal of Educational Measurement, 27, 1-14.
43. Zwick, R. (1987). Assessing the dimensionality of NAEP reading data. Journal of Educational Measurement, 24, 293-308.