Sample Size Requirements for Estimation of Item Parameters in the Multidimensional Graded Response Model

Frontiers in Psychology

Volumn 7, Issue , 2016, Pages

  Jiang, Shengyu ^a   Wang, Chun ^a   Weiss, David J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

Author keywords

graded response model; item parameters; multidimensionality; parameter recovery; sample size

Indexed keywords

EID: 85067219462     PISSN: None     EISSN: 16641078     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00109     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Babcock B. (2011). Estimating a noncompensatory IRT model using Metropolis within Gibbs sampling. Appl. Psychol. Meas. 35, 317–329. 10.1177/0146621610392366
2. Bjorner J. B. Kosinski M. Ware J. E. Jr. (2003). Calibration of an item pool for assessing the burden of headaches: an application of item response theory to the Headache Impact Test (HIT™). Qual. Life Res. 12, 913–933. 10.1023/A:102616311344614651412
3. Bolt D. M. Hare R. D. Vitale J. E. Newman J. P. (2004). A multigroup item response theory analysis of the psychopathy checklist–revised. Psychol. Assess. 16, 155–168. 10.1037/1040-3590.16.2.15515222812
4. Cai L. (2010). High-dimensional exploratory item factor analysis by a Metropolis-Hastings Robbins-Monro algorithm. Psychometrika 75, 33–57. 10.1007/s11336-009-9136-x
5. Cai L. (2013). flexMIRT: A Numerical Engine for Flexible Multilevel Multidimensional Item Analysis and Test Scoring (Version 2.0) [Computer software]. Chapel Hill, NC: Vector Psychometric Group.
6. De Ayala R. J. (1994). The influence of multidimensionality on the graded response model. Appl. Psychol. Meas. 18, 155–170. 10.1177/014662169401800205
7. Ferrando P. J. Chico E. (2001). The construct of sensation seeking as measured by Zuckerman's SSS-V and Arnett's AISS: a structural equation model. Pers. Individ. Diff. 31, 1121–1133. 10.1016/S0191-8869(00)00208-7
8. Fletcher R. B. Hattie J. A. (2004). An examination of the psychometric properties of the physical self-description questionnaire using a polytomous item response model. Psychol. Sport Exerc. 5, 423–446. 10.1016/S1469-0292(03)00036-0
9. Forero C. G. Maydeu-Olivares A. (2009). Estimation of IRT graded response models: limited versus full information methods. Psychol. Methods 14, 275. 10.1037/a001582519719362
10. Forero C. G. Maydeu-Olivares A. Gallardo-Pujol D. (2009). Factor analysis with ordinal indicators: a monte carlo study comparing DWLS and ULS estimation. Struct. Equat. Model. 16, 625–641. 10.1080/10705510903203573
11. Forero C. G. Vilagut G. Adroher N. D. Alonso J. (2013). Multidimensional item response theory models yielded good fit and reliable scores for the Short Form-12 questionnaire. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 66, 790–801. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.02.00723707080
12. Fraley R. C. Waller N. G. Brennan K. A. (2000). An item response theory analysis of self-report measures of adult attachment. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 78, 350–365. 10.1037/0022-3514.78.2.35010707340
13. Hsieh C.-A. von Eye A. A. Maier K. S. (2010). Using a multivariate multilevel polytomous item response theory model to study parallel processes of change: the dynamic association between adolescents' aocial isolation and engagement with delinquent peers in the National Youth Survey. Multivariate Behav. Res. 45, 508–552. 10.1080/00273171.2010.48338726760491
14. Muthén L. K. Muthén B. O. (1998–2012). Mplus User's Guide 7th Edn. Los Angeles, CA: Author.
15. Nering M. L. Ostini R. (Eds.). (2010). Handbook of Polytomous Item Response Theory Models. New York, NY: Routledge.
16. Pilkonis P. A. Kim Y. Yu L. Morse J. Q. (2014). Adult Attachment Ratings (AAR): an item response theory analysis. J. Pers. Assess. 96, 417–425. 10.1080/00223891.2013.83226124033268
17. R Core Team (2015). R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria. Available online at: http://www.R-project.org/
18. Reise S. P. Yu J. (1990). Parameter recovery in the graded response model using MULTILOG. J. Educ. Meas. 27, 133–144. 10.1111/j.1745-3984.1990.tb00738.x
19. Samejima F. (1969). Estimation of Latent Ability Using a Response Pattern of Graded Scores (Psychometric Monograph No. 17). Richmond, VA: Psychometric Society. Available online at: http://www.psychometrika.org/journal/online/MN17.pdf
20. Scherbaum C. A. Cohen-Charash Y. Kern M. J. (2006). Measuring general self-efficacy: a comparison of three measures using item response theory. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 66, 1047–1063. 10.1177/0013164406288171
21. Thomas M. L. Brown G. G. Gur R. C. Hansen J. A. Nock M. K. Heeringa S. et al. (2013). Parallel psychometric and cognitive modeling analyses of the Penn face memory test in the army study to assess risk and resilience in service members. J. Clin. Exp. Neuropsychol. 35, 225–245. 10.1080/13803395.2012.76297423383967
22. van der Linden W. J. Hambleton R. K. (Eds.). (1997). Handbook of Modern Item Response Theory. New York, NY: Springer.
23. Walton K. E. Roberts B. W. Krueger R. F. Blonigen D. M. Hicks B. M. (2008). Capturing abnormal personality with normal personality inventories: an item response theory approach. J. Pers. 76, 1623–1648. 10.1111/j.1467-6494.2008.00533.x19012660
24. Wang C. Nydick S. W. (2014). Comparing two algorithms for calibrating the restricted non-compensatory multidimensional IRT Model. Appl. Psychol. Meas. 39, 119–134. 10.1177/0146621614545983
25. Wang C. (2015). On latent trait estimation in multidimensional compensatory item response models. Psychometrika 80, 428–449. 10.1007/s11336-013-9399-024604245
26. Warm T. A. (1989). Weighted likelihood estimation of ability in item response theory. Psychometrika 54, 427–450. 10.1007/BF02294627
27. Zagorsek H. Stough S. J. Jaklic M. (2006). Analysis of the reliability of the Leadership Practices Inventory in the item response theory framework. Int. J. Sel. Assess. 14, 180–191. 10.1111/j.1468-2389.2006.00343.x
28. Zickar M. J. Robie C. (1999). Modeling faking good on personality items: an item-level analysis. J. Appl. Psychol. 84, 551–563. 10.1037/0021-9010.84.4.551