Recognizing Uncertainty in the Q-Matrix via a Bayesian Extension of the DINA Model

Applied Psychological Measurement

Volumn 36, Issue 6, 2012, Pages 447-468

  DeCarlo, Lawrence T ^a  

^a Och Spine at New York Presbyterian Hospitals   (United States)

Author keywords

Bayesian analysis; cognitive diagnosis; DINA; fraction subtraction data; Q matrix

Indexed keywords

EID: 84864762983     PISSN: 01466216     EISSN: 15523497     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0146621612449069     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Barnes T.,Bitzer D.,Vouk M.Experimental analysis of the q-matrix method in knowledge discovery. Proceedings of the 15th International Symposium on Methodologies for Intelligent Systems 2005; 2005Saratoga Springs, NY; 2005.
2. Cen H.,Koedinger K.,Junker B.Learning factors analysis-A general method for cognitive model evaluation and improvement. Intelligent tutoring systems: 8th International Conference; 2005; 2005. 164.
3. DeCarlo L.T.On the statistical and theoretical basis of signal detection theory and extensions: Unequal variance, random coefficient, and mixture models.Journal of Mathematical Psychology. 2010;54:304-313.
4. DeCarlo L.T.On the analysis of fraction subtraction data: The DINA model, classification, latent class sizes, and the Q-matrix.Applied Psychological Measurement. 2011;35:8-26.
5. de la Torre J.An empirically based method of Q-matrix validation for the DINA model: Development and applications.Journal of Educational Measurement. 2008;45:343-362.
6. de la Torre J.DINA model and parameter estimation: A didactic.Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics. 2009;34:115-130.
7. de la Torre J.,Douglas J.A.Higher-order latent trait models for cognitive diagnosis.Psychometrika. 2004;69:333-353.
8. de la Torre J.,Douglas J.A.Model evaluation and multiple strategies in cognitive diagnosis: An analysis of fraction subtraction data.Psychometrika. 2008;73:595-624.
9. DiBello L. V.,Roussos L.A.,Stout W.F.Handbook of statistics, Volume 26: Psychometrics. Rao C.R.Sinharay S., ed. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier; 2007:979-1030.
10. Fu J.,Li Y. An integrative review of cognitively diagnostic psychometric models. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education; Chicago, IL.
11. Geyer C.J.Practical Markov chain Monte Carlo.Statistical Science. 1992;7:473-483.
12. Haertel E.H.Using restricted latent class models to map the skill structure of achievement items.Journal of Educational Measurement. 1989;26:301-321.
13. Henson R.A.,Roussos L.,Douglas J.,He X.Cognitive diagnostic attribute-level discrimination indices.Applied Psychological Measurement. 2008;32:275-288.
14. Henson R.A.,Templin J.L.,Willse J.T.Defining a family of cognitive diagnosis models using log-linear models with latent variables.Psychometrika. 2009;74:191-210.
15. Junker B.W.,Sijtsma K.Cognitive assessment models with few assumptions, and connections with nonparametric item response theory.Applied Psychological Measurement. 2001;25:258-272.
16. Lee P.M.Bayesian statistics: An introduction. 2004). Bayesian statistics: An introduction (3rd ed.). London, England: Hodder Education.London, England: Hodder Education; 2004:.
17. Macmillan N.A.,Creelman C.D.Detection theory: A user's guide. 2005). Detection theory: A user's guide (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.New York, NY: Cambridge University Press; 2005:.
18. Macready G.B.,Dayton C.M.The use of probabilistic models in the assessment of mastery.Journal of Educational Statistics. 1977;2:99-120.
19. Maris E.Estimating multiple classification latent class models.Psychometrika. 1999;64:187-212.
20. Mislevy R.J.Test theory reconceived.Journal of Educational Measurement. 1996;33:379-416.
21. MuthénB.AsparouhovT. (2010). Bayesian SEM: A more flexible representation of substantive theory. Available from http://www.statmodel.com.
22. Rabe-HeskethS.SkrondalA.PicklesA. (2004). GLLAMM manual (Technical Report No. 160, U.C. Berkeley Division of Biostatistics Working Paper Series). Berkeley: University of California. Retrieved from http://www.bepress.com/ucbbiostat/paper160/.
23. Rupp A. A.,Templin J.L.The effects of Q-matrix misspecification on parameter estimates and classification accuracy in the DINA model.Educational and Psychological Measurement. 2008a;68:78-96.
24. Rupp A. A.,Templin J.L.Unique characteristics of diagnostic classification models: A comprehensive review of the current state-of-the-art.Measurement. 2008b;6:219-262.
25. SpiegelhalterD.ThomasA.BestN. G.LunnD. (2003). WinBUGS user manual. Retrieved from http://www.mrc-bsu.cam.ac.uk/bugs/.
26. Tatsuoka C.Data analytic methods for latent partially ordered classification models.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series C (Applied Statistics). 2002;51:337-350.
27. Tatsuoka K.K.Diagnostic monitoring of skill and knowledge acquisition. Frederiksen N.Glaser R.Lesgold A.Shafto M., ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum; 1990:453-488.
28. Templin J.,Henson R. A Bayesian method for incorporating uncertainty into Q-matrix estimation in skills assessment. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education; San Francisco, CA.
29. Templin J.L.,Henson R.A.,Templin S.E.,Roussos L.Robustness of hierarchical modeling of skill association in cognitive diagnosis models.Applied Psychological Measurement. 2008;32:559-574.
30. ThomasA.O'HaraB.LiggesU.SturtzS. (2006). Making BUGS open. R News, 6, 12-17. Retrieved from http://mathstat.helsinki.fi/openbugs/FAQFrames.html.
31. Vermunt J.K.LEM: A general program for the analysis of categorical data. Tilburg, Netherlands: Tilburg University; 1997:.
32. Vermunt J.K.,Magidson J.Technical guide for Latent Gold 4.0: Basic and advanced. Belmont, MA: Statistical Innovations; 2005:.