A 32-providing subscale scores for diagnostic information: A case study when the test is essentially unidimensional

Applied Measurement in Education

Volumn 23, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 63-86

  Stone, Clement A ^a   Ye, Feifei ^a   Zhu, Xiaowen ^a   Lane, Suzanne ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 73149121132     PISSN: 08957347     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/08957340903423651     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Bock, R. D., Thissen, D., & Zimowski, M. F. (1997). IRT estimation of domain scores. Journal of Educational Measurement,34, 197-211.
2. de la Torre, J., & Karelitz, T. M. (2008, March). When do measurement models produce diagnostic information? An investigation of the assumptions of cognitive diagnostic modeling. Paper pre- sented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, New York.
3. Edwards, M. C. (2002). Augmenting IRT scale scores: A Monte Carlo study to evaluate an empirical Bayes approach to subscore augmentation. Unpublished master's thesis, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC.
4. Edwards, M. C., & Vevea, J. L. (2006). An empirical Bayes approach to subscore augmentation: How much strength can we borrow? Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 31(3), 241-259.
5. Fraser, C. H. (1987). NOHARM: An IBM PC computer program for fitting both unidimensional and multidimensional normal ogive models for latent trait theory [Computer program]. Armidale, New Wouth Wales, Australia: Center for Behavioral Studies, the University of New England.
6. Haberman, S. J. (2005). When can subscores have value? (ETS RR-05-08). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
7. Junker, B. W. (1999, November). Some statistical models and computational methods that may be useful for cognitively-relevant assessments. Paper prepared for the Committee on the Foundations of Assessment, National Research Council.
8. Kim, J., & Bolt, D. M. (2007). Estimating item response theory models using Markov Chain Monte Carlo method. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice,4, 38-51.
9. Luecht, R. M., Gierl, M. J., Tan, X., & Huff, K. (2006, April). Scalability and the development of useful diagnostic scales. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, San Francisco, CA.
10. Madaus, G., Airasian, P., & Kellaghan, T. (1980). School effectiveness: A reassessment of the evidence. New York: McGraw Hill.
11. Muchinsky, P. M. (1996). The correction for attenuation. Educational and Psychological Measurement,56, 63-75.
12. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2005). Mplus User's Guide. (Version 3). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
13. Reckase, M. D. (1997). A linear logistic multidimensional model for dichotomous item response data. In W. J. v. d. Linden & R. K. Hambleton (Eds.), Handbook of modern item response theory (pp. 271-286). New York: Springer-Verlag.
14. Reckase, M. D. (1979). Unifactor latent trait models applied to multifactor tests: Results and implications. Journal of Educational Statistics,4, 207-233.
15. Sheng, Y., & Wikle, C. K. (2007). Comparing multiunidimensional and unidimensional item response theory models. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 6, 899-919.
16. Sinharay, S., Haberman, S. J., & Puhan, G. (2007). Subscores based on classical test theory: To report or not to report. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 4, 21-28.
17. Spearman, C. (1904). The proof and measurement with faulty data. British Journal of Psychology, 3, 271-295.
18. Spiegelhalter, D. J., Thomas, A., Best, N. G., & Lunn, D. (2004). WinBUGS version 1.4.1: user manual. Cambridge Medical Research Council Biostatistics Unit. Retrieved October 2, 2006, from http:// www.mrcbsu. cam.ac.uk/bugs/
19. Swaminathan, H., & Gifford, J. A. (1986). Bayesian estimation in the three-parameter logistic model. Psychometrika, 51, 581-601.
20. Thissen, D. (1991). MULTILOG: Multiple categorical item analysis and test scoring, Version 7. Chicago, IL: Scientific Software.
21. Thissen, D., & Edwards, M. C. (2005, April). Diagnostic scores augmented using multidimensional item response theory: Preliminary investigation of MCMC strategies. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, Montreal, PQ, Canada.
22. Wainer, H., Vevea, J. L., Camacho, F., Reeve, B. B., Rosa, K., Nelson, L., et al. (2001). Augmented scores-"borrowing strength" to compute scores based on small numbers of items. In D. Thissen & H. Wainer (Eds.), Test scoring (pp. 343-387). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
23. Wilson, D., Wood, R., & Gibbons, R. D. (1987). TESTFACT: Test scoring, item statistics, and item factor analysis [Computer program]. Mooresville, IN: Scientific Software.
24. Yao, L., & Boughton, K. A. (2007). A multidimensional item response modeling approach for improving subscale proficiency estimation and classification. Applied Psychological Measurement, 31(2), 83-105.
25. Yen, W. M. (1987, June). A Bayesian/IRT index of objective performance. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Psychometric Society, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
26. Yen, W. M., Skykes, R. C., Ito, K., & Julian, M. (1997, April). A Bayesian/IRT index of objective performance for tests with mixed-item types. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, Chicago.
27. Zimmerman, D. W., & Williams, R. H. (1997). Properties of the Spearman correction for attenuma- tion for normal and realistic non-normal distributions. Applied Psychological Measurement, 3, 253-270.