Applications of the analytically derived asymptotic standard errors of item response theory item parameter estimates

Journal of Educational Measurement

Volumn 41, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 85-117

  Li, Yuan H ^a,c   Lissitz, Robert W ^b  

^a Prince George's County Public Schools   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

^c Prnc George's County Public Schools   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 4544331650     PISSN: 00220655     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-3984.2004.tb01109.x     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Ackerman, T. A. (1992). A didactic explanation of item bias, item impact, and item validity from a multidimensional perspective. Journal of Educational Measurement, 29, 67-91.
2. Anderson, J. A., & Richardson, S. C. (1979). Logistic discrimination and bias correction in maximum likelihood estimation. Technometrics, 21, 71-78.
3. Baker, F. B. (1992). Item response theory: Parameter estimation techniques. New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc.
4. Beaton, A. E., & Zwick, R. (1992). Overview of the national assessment of educational progress. Journal of Educational Statistics, 17, 95-109.
5. Bock, R. D. (1972). Estimating item parameters and latent trait ability when responses are scored in two or more nominal categories. Psychometrika, 37, 29-51.
6. De Ayala, R. J., & Sava-Bolesta, M. (1999). Item parameter recovery for the nominal response model. Applied Psychological Measurement, 23, 3-19.
7. Divgi, D. R. (1985). A minimum chi-square method for developing a common metric in item response theory. Applied Psychological Measurement, 9, 413-415.
8. Educational Testing Service (1998). Algebra end-of-course examination report. Princeton, NJ.
9. Gruijter, D. N. M. de (1984). A comment on some standard errors in item response theory. Psychometrika, 49, 269-272.
10. Haebara, T. (1980). Equating logistic ability scales by weighted least squares method. Japanese Psychological Research, 22, 144-149.
11. Hambleton, R. K., Jones, R. W. & Rogers, H. J. (1993). Influence of item parameter estimation errors in test development. Journal of Educational Measurement, 30, 143-155.
12. Hambleton, R. K., & Swaminathan, H. (1985). Item response theory: Principles and applications. Boston: Kluwer Nijhoff Publishing.
13. Hambleton, R. K., Swaminathan, H., & Rogers, H. J. (1991). Fundamentals of item response theory. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
14. Harwell, M. R., Stone, C. A., Hsu, T., & Kirisci, L. (1996). Monte carlo studies in item response theory. Applied Psychological Measurement, 20, 101-125.
15. Kolen, M. J., & Brennan, R. L. (1995). Test equating: Methods and practices. New York: Springer.
16. Li, Y. H. (1999). EQUMIXED: A computer program to estimate equating coefficients for mixed-format tests [Computer software]. Upper Marlboro, MD: Author.
17. Li, Y. H. (2001, April). Standard errors of multidimensional IRT item estimates. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA.
18. Li, Y. H. (2002a). Analytically asymptotic standard errors of multidimensional IRT item parameters. In S. P. Shohov (Ed.), Advances in psychology research, 13, 87-108. New York: NOVA Science Publishers, Inc.
19. Li, Y. H. (2002b, April). Using the simulation-based approach to quantify the standard errors of the IRT true-score equating scores. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
20. Li, Y. H., & Lissitz, R. W. (2000). An evaluation of multidimensional IRT linking. Applied Psychological Measurement, 24, 115-138.
21. Li, Y. H., Lissitz, R. W., & Yang, Y. N. (1999, April). Estimating IRT equating coefficients for tests with polytomously and dichotomously scored items. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, Montreal, Canada.
22. Li, Y. H., Tam, H. P., & Tompkins, L. J. (in press). A comparison of using the fixed common-precalibrated parameter method and the matched characteristic curve method for linking multiple-test items. International Journal of Testing
23. Lord, F. M. (1980). Applications of item response theory to practical testing problems. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
24. Lord, F. M. (1982). Standard error of an equating by item response theory. Applied Psychological Measurement, 6, 463-472.
25. Loyd, B. H., & Hoover, H. D. (1980). Vertical equating using the Rash model. Journal of Educational Measurement, 17, 179-193.
26. Marco, G. L. (1977). Item characteristic curve solutions to three intractable testing programs. Journal of Educational Measurement, 14, 139-160.
27. Masters, G. N. (1982). A Rasch model for partial credit scoring. Psychometrika, 47, 149-174.
28. Mislevy, R. J., & Bock, R. D. (1990). BILOG-3: Item analysis and test scoring with binary logistic models [Computer program]. Mooresville: Scientific Software.
29. Muraki, E. (1992). A generalized partial credit model: Application of an EM algorithm. Applied Psychological Measurement, 16, 159-176.
30. Muraki, E. (1997). RESGEN2.1: Item response generator [Computer program]. Educational Testing Service.
31. Muraki, E., & Bock, R. D. (1996). PARSCALE (Version 3.): IRT based test scoring and item analysis for graded open-ended exercises and performance tasks [Computer program]. Mooresville: Scientific Software.
32. Nakamura, S. (1996). Numerical analysis and graphic visualization with MATLAB. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
33. Ogasawara, H. (2001a). Item response theory true score equating and their standard errors. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 26, 31-50.
34. Ogasawara, H. (2001b). Standard errors of item response theory equating/linking by response function methods. Applied Psychological Measurement, 25, 53-67.
35. Reckase, M. D. (1985). The difficulty of items that measure more than one ability. Applied Psychological Measurement, 9, 401-412.
36. Seong, T. (1990). Sensitivity of marginal maximum likelihood estimation of item and ability parameters to the characteristics of the prior ability distributions. Applied Psychological Measurement, 14, 299-311.
37. Stocking, M. L. (1990). Specifying optimum examinees for item parameter estimation in item response theory. Psychometrika, 3, 461-475.
38. Stocking, M. L., & Lord, F. M. (1983). Developing a common metric in item response theory. Applied Psychological Measurement, 7, 201-210.
39. Tam, H. P., & Li, Y. H. (1997, March). Is the use of the difference likelihood ratio chi-square statistic for comparing nested IRT models justifiable? Paper presented at the annual meeting of American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
40. The MathWorks, Inc. (2001). MATLAB (Version 6.1): The language of technical computing [Computer program]. Natick, MA: The MathWorks, Inc.
41. Thissen, D. (1993). Repealing rules that no longer apply to psychological measurement. In N. Frederiksen, R. J. Mislevy & I. Bejar (Eds.) Test theory for a new generation of tests. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
42. Thissen, D., & Wainer, H. (1982). Some standard errors in item response theory. Psychometrika, 47, 397-412.
43. Tsai, T. (1998). A comparison of bootstrap standard errors of IRT equating methods for the common item nonequivalent groups design (Doctoral dissertation, University of Iowa, 1998). Dissertation Abstracts International, UMI Number 9917609).
44. Vale, C. D. (1986). Linking item parameters onto a common scale. Applied Psychological Measurement, 10, 333-344.
45. Zeng, L., & Kolen, M. J. (1994, April). IRT scale transformations using numerical integration. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.