Vertical scaling with the Rasch model utilizing default and tight convergence settings with WINSTEPS and BILOG - MG

Applied Measurement in Education

Volumn 19, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 133-149

  Custer, Michael ^a,b   Omar, Md Hafidz ^a   Pomplun, Mark ^a  

^a Riverside Publishing Company   (United States)

^b NONE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33646676268     PISSN: 08957347     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1207/s15324818ame1902_4     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Beguin, A. A., & Hanson, B. A. (2001). Effect of noncompensatory multidimensionality on separate and concurrent estimation in IRT observed score equating. In Measurement and Research Department Reports, 2001-2 (pp. 1-36). Arnhem, Maart, Netherlands: Citogroep.
2. CTB/McGraw-Hill. (1996). California Achievement Test (5th ed). Monterey, CA: Author.
3. Camilli, G. (1988). Scale shrinkage and estimation of latent distribution parameters. Journal of Educational Statistics. 13, 227-242.
4. Camilli, G., Yamamoto, K., & Wang, M. (1993). Scale shrinkage in vertical equating. Applied Psychological Measurement, 17, 379-388.
5. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
6. DeMars, C. (2002). Incomplete data and item parameter estimates under JMLE and MML estimation, Applied Measurement in Education, 15, 15-32.
7. Divgi, D. R. (1986). Does the Rasch model really work for multiple-choice items? Not if you look closely. Journal of Educational Measurement, 23, 283-298.
8. Hambleton, R. K., Swaminathan, H., & Rogers, H. J. (1991). Fundamentals of item response theory. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
9. Hanson, B. A., & Beguin, A. A. (1999, April). Obtaining a common scale for IRT item parameters using separate versus concurrent estimation in the common item nonequivalent groups equating design. Paper presented at the annual meeting of National Council on Measurement in Education, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
10. Hedges L. V., & Vevea, J. L. (1997). A study of equating in NAEP. Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research.
11. Linacre, J. M. (2004). WINSTEPS Rasch measurement computer program on-line manual. Retrieved April 29, 2004, from the World Wide Web: winsteps.com
12. Linacre, J. M., & Wright, B. J. (1998). A user's guide to BIGSTEPS/WINSTEPS: Rasch model computer program. Chicago: MESA Press.
13. Lee, O. K. (1991). Convergence: Statistics or substance? Rasch Measurement: Transactions of the Rasch Measurement, 5, 172.
14. Lee, O. K (1992). Calibration matrices for test equating? Rasch Measurement: Transactions of the Rasch Measurement, 6, 202-203.
15. Mislevy, R. J. (1988). Exploiting collateral information in the estimation of item parameters: Final report (RR 88-53 ONR). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
16. Pomplun, M., Omar, M. H., & Custer, M. (2004). A comparison of WINSTEPS and BILOG-MG for vertical scaling with the Rasch model. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64, 600-616.
17. Skaggs, G., & Lissitz, R. W. (1985). Test equating: Relevant issues and a review of recent research. Review of Educational Research, 56, 495-530.
18. Williams, V. S. L., Pommerich, M., & Thissen, D. (1998). A comparison of developmental scales based on Thurstone methods and item response theory. Journal of Educational Measurement, 35, 93-108.
19. Wu, M. L., Adams, R. J., & Wilson, M. R. (1998). ACER ConQuest [Computer software]. Melbourne, Australia: Australian Council for Educational Research.
20. Yen, W. (1985). Increasing item complexity: A possible cause of scale shrinkage for unidimensional item response theory. Psychometrika, 50, 399-410.
21. Zimowski, M. F., Muraki, E., Mislevy, R. J., & Bock, R. D. (1996). BILOG-MG: Multiple-group IRT analysis and test maintenance for binary items. Chicago: Scientific Software International.