The use of hierarchical generalized linear model for item dimensionality assessment

Journal of Educational Measurement

Volumn 41, Issue 4, 2004, Pages 379-395

  Beretvas, S Natasha ^a   Williams, Natasha J ^b,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN   (United States)

^b ACT INC   (United States)

^c American College Testing Incorporated   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 11144285030     PISSN: 00220655     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-3984.2004.tb01172.x     Document Type: Review

References (20)

1. Adaras, R. J., Wilson, M., & Wu, M. (1997). Multilevel item response models: An approach to errors in variables regression. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 22, 47-76.
2. Bock, R. D. (1997). A brief history of item response theory. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 16, 21-31.
3. Bryk, A. S., Raudenbush, S. W., Cheong, Y. F., & Congdon, R. (2000). HLM: Hierarchical linear and nonlinear modeling with the HLM/2L and HLM/3L programs [Computer program]. Chicago: Scientific Software International.
4. Cheong, Y. F., & Raudenbush, S. W. (2000). Measurement and structural models for children's problem behaviors. Psychological Methods, 5, 477-495.
5. Doody-Bogan, E., & Yen, W. M. (1983). Detecting multidimensionality and examining its effects on vertical equating with the three-parameter logistic model. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montréal.
6. Embretson, S. E., & Reise, S. P. (2000). Item response theory for psychologists. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Ehrlbaum Associates.
7. Fraser, C. (1988). NOHARM: A computer program for fitting both unidimensional and multidimensional normal ogive models of latent trait theory [Computer software]. Armidale, New South Wales, Australia: University of New England, Center for Behavioral Studies.
8. Kamata, A. (1998). Some generalizations of the Rasch model: An application of the hierarchical generalized linear model. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, East Lansing.
9. Kamata, A. (2001). Item analysis by the hierarchical generalized linear model. Journal of Educational Measurement, 38, 79-93.
10. Luppescu, S. (2002). DIF detection in HLM item analysis. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
11. McDonald, R. P. (1999). Test theory: A unified treatment. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Ehrlbaum Associates.
12. Muraki, E., & Bock, R. D. (1996). Parscale: IRT based test scoring and item analysis for graded open-ended exercises and performance tasks. Chicago, IL: Scientific Software, Inc.
13. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Public Law No. 107-110, 115 Stat. 1425 (2001).
14. Roussos, L., & Stout, W. (1996). A multidimensionality-based DIF analysis paradigm. Applied Psychological Measurement, 20, 355-371.
15. SAS Institute. (2001). SAS procedures guide, version 8 (2nd ed.). Cary, NC: Author.
16. Shealy, R., & Stout, W. F. (1993b). A model-based standardization approach that separates true DIF/bias from group differences and detects test bias/DTIF as well as item bias/DIF. Psychometrika, 58, 159-194.
17. Stout, W. F. (1987). A nonparametric approach for assessing latent trait dimensionality. Psychometrika, 52, 589-617.
18. Walker, C. M., & Beretvas, S. N. (2001). An empirical investigation demonstrating the multidimensional DIF paradigm: A cognitive explanation for DIF. Journal of Educational Measurement, 38, 147-163.
19. Wilson, D., Wood, R., & Gibbons, R. D. (1991). TESTFACT: Test scoring, item statistics, and item factor analysis. Mooresville, IN: Scientific Software.
20. Wu, M. L., Adams, R. J., & Wilson, M. R. (1997). ConQuest [Computer program]. Australian Council of Educational Research.