×

A relation between a between-item multidimensional IRT model and the mixture Rasch model. (English) Zbl 1306.62489

Summary: Two generalizations of the Rasch model are compared: the between-item multidimensional model [R. J. Adams et al., “The multidimensional random coefficients multinomial logit model”, Appl. Psych. Measurement 21, No. 1, 1–23 (1997; doi:10.1177/0146621697211001)], and the mixture Rasch model [R. J. Mislevy and N. Verhelst, “Modeling item responses when different subjects employ different solution strategies”, ibid. 55, No. 2, 195–215 (1990; doi:10.1007/BF02295283); J. Rost, “Rasch models in latent classes: an integration of two approaches to item analysis”, Appl. Psych. Measurement 14, No. 3, 271–282 (1990; doi:10.1177/014662169001400305)]. It is shown that the between-item multidimensional model is formally equivalent with a continuous mixture of Rasch models for which, within each class of the mixture, the item parameters are equal to the item parameters of the multidimensional model up to a shift parameter that is specific for the dimension an item belongs to in the multidimensional model. In a simulation study, the relation between both types of models also holds when the number of classes of the mixture is as small as two. The relation is illustrated with a study on verbal aggression.

MSC:

62P15 Applications of statistics to psychology

Software:

SAS
Full Text: DOI

References:

[1] Adams R.J., Wilson M., Wang W.C. (1997) The multidimensional random coefficients multinomial logit model. Applied Psychological Measurement 21:1–23 · doi:10.1177/0146621697211001
[2] Bock R.D., Gibbons R., Muraki E. (1988) Full-information item factor analysis. Applied Psychological Measurement 12:261–280 · doi:10.1177/014662168801200305
[3] De Leeuw J., Verhelst N. (1986) Maximum likelihood estimation in generalized Rasch models. Journal of Educational Statistics 11:183–196
[4] Lindsay B., Clogg C.C., Grego J. (1991) Semiparametric estimation in the Rasch model and related exponential response models, including a simple latent class model for item analysis. Journal of the American Statistical Association 86:96–108 · Zbl 0735.62107 · doi:10.1080/01621459.1991.10475008
[5] Mislevy R.J., Verhelst N. (1990) Modeling item responses when different subjects employ different solution strategies. Psychometrika 55:195–215 · doi:10.1007/BF02295283
[6] Mislevy R.J., Wilson M. (1996) Marginal maximum likelihood estimation for a psychometric model of discontinuous development. Psychometrika 61:41–71 · Zbl 0866.62077 · doi:10.1007/BF02296958
[7] Reise S.P., Gomel J.N. (1995) Modeling qualitative variation within latent trait dimensions: Application of mixed-measurement to personality assessment. Multivariate Behavioral Research 30:341–358 · doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr3003_3
[8] Rijmen F., Tuerlinckx F., De Boeck P., Kuppens P. (2003) A nonlinear mixed models framework for IRT models. Psychological Methods 8:185–205 · doi:10.1037/1082-989X.8.2.185
[9] Rost J. (1990) Rasch models in latent classes: An integration of two approaches to item analysis. Applied Psychological Measurement 14:271–282 · doi:10.1177/014662169001400305
[10] SAS Institute Inc. (1999). SAS OnlineDoc (Version 8) [software manual on CD-ROM]. SAS Institute Inc, Cary NC
[11] Schwartz G. (1978) Estimating the dimension of a model. The Annals of Statistics 6:461–464 · Zbl 0379.62005 · doi:10.1214/aos/1176344136
[12] Tjur T. (1982) A connection between Rasch’s item analysis model and a multiplicative Poisson model. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics 9:23–30 · Zbl 0484.62115
[13] Vansteelandt K. (1999) A formal model for the competency-demand hypothesis. European Journal of Personality 13(5, Spec Issue):429–442 · doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-0984(199909/10)13:5<429::AID-PER359>3.0.CO;2-R
[14] Wilson M.(1989) Saltus: a psychometric model of discontinuity in cognitive development. Psychological Bulletin 105:276–289 · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.105.2.276
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. In some cases that data have been complemented/enhanced by data from zbMATH Open. This attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming completeness or a perfect matching.