A Comparison of the Relative Performance of Four IRT Models on Equating Passage-Based Tests

被引:4
|
作者
Kim, Kyung Yong [1 ]
Lim, Euijin [2 ]
Lee, Won-Chan [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ North Carolina Greensboro, Educ Res Methodol, Greensboro, NC 27412 USA
[2] Seoul Natl Univ, TEPS Ctr, Language Educ Inst, Seoul, South Korea
[3] Univ Iowa, CASMA, Iowa City, IA 52242 USA
关键词
equating; item response theory; bifactor model; testlet response theory model;
D O I
10.1080/15305058.2018.1530239
中图分类号
C [社会科学总论];
学科分类号
03 ; 0303 ;
摘要
For passage-based tests, items that belong to a common passage often violate the local independence assumption of unidimensional item response theory (UIRT). In this case, ignoring local item dependence (LID) and estimating item parameters using a UIRT model could be problematic because doing so might result in inaccurate parameter estimates, which, in turn, could impact the results of equating. Under the random groups design, the main purpose of this article was to compare the relative performance of the three-parameter logistic (3PL), graded response (GR), bifactor, and testlet models on equating passage-based tests when various degrees of LID were present due to passage. Simulation results showed that the testlet model produced the most accurate equating results, followed by the bifactor model. The 3PL model worked as well as the bifactor and testlet models when the degree of LID was low but returned less accurate equating results than the two multidimensional models as the degree of LID increased. Among the four models, the polytomous GR model provided the least accurate equating results.
引用
收藏
页码:248 / 269
页数:22
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Comparison of four light-response models using relative curvature measures of nonlinearity
    He, Ke
    Wang, Lin
    Ratkowsky, David A.
    Shi, Peijian
    SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, 2024, 14 (01):
  • [22] Short-term Electricity Load Forecast Performance Comparison Based on Four Neural Network Models
    Wang Jie-sheng
    Zhu Qing-wen
    2015 27TH CHINESE CONTROL AND DECISION CONFERENCE (CCDC), 2015, : 2952 - 2956
  • [23] Comparison of swirling effects on ejector performance using four turbulence models
    Zhou, B.
    Fleck, B.A.
    Bouak, F.
    Gauthier, J.E.D.
    Canadian Aeronautics and Space Journal, 2000, 46 (04): : 178 - 182
  • [24] Detecting significant change in neuropsychological test performance: A comparison of four models
    Temkin, NR
    Heaton, RK
    Grant, I
    Dikmen, SS
    JOURNAL OF THE INTERNATIONAL NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL SOCIETY, 1999, 5 (04) : 357 - 369
  • [25] A Component-Based Performance Comparison of Four Hypervisors
    Hwang, Jinho
    Zeng, Sai
    Wu, Frederick Y.
    Wood, Timothy
    2013 IFIP/IEEE INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON INTEGRATED NETWORK MANAGEMENT (IM 2013), 2013, : 269 - 276
  • [26] Bayesian Model Selection Methods for Multilevel IRT Models: A Comparison of Five DIC-Based Indices
    Zhang, Xue
    Tao, Jian
    Wang, Chun
    Shi, Ning-Zhong
    JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL MEASUREMENT, 2019, 56 (01) : 3 - 27
  • [27] Comparison of the relative toxicity relationships based on batch and continuous algal toxicity tests
    Chen, CY
    Lin, KC
    Yang, DT
    CHEMOSPHERE, 1997, 35 (09) : 1959 - 1965
  • [28] Comparison of four performance models in quantifying the inequality of leaf and fruit size distribution
    Wang, Lin
    He, Ke
    Hui, Cang
    Ratkowsky, David A.
    Yao, Weihao
    Lian, Meng
    Wang, Jinfeng
    Shi, Peijian
    ECOLOGY AND EVOLUTION, 2024, 14 (03):
  • [29] Investigating radar relative calibration biases based on four-dimensional reflectivity comparison
    Seo, Bong-Chul
    Krajewski, Witold F.
    Smith, James A.
    WEATHER RADAR AND HYDROLOGY, 2012, 351 : 375 - +
  • [30] PERFORMANCE COMPARISON OF THREE AND FOUR CELL SOLID PHASE TESTS FOR RED CELL ANTIBODY SCREENING
    Fleiter, B.
    VOX SANGUINIS, 2010, 99 : 355 - 355