Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics · 2011 · 46 citations · 12 references
EducationEducational MeasurementPsychologyExperimental DesignItem Response TheoryPsychometricsAbility EstimationItem BiasLatent Trait ModelingResponse BiasAbility Parameter EstimationItem Response Theory AnalysisLog-likelihood FunctionsModel ComplexityPrecision Of Ability EstimatesRobust Ability EstimationRobust EstimationSimulation Studies
Because of response disturbances such as guessing, cheating, or carelessness, item response models often can only approximate the “true” individual response probabilities. As a consequence, maximum-likelihood estimates of ability will be biased. Typically, the nature and extent to which response disturbances are present is unknown, and, therefore, accounting for them by altering the model is not possible. Even if the nature of the response disturbances were known, accounting for them by increasing model complexity could easily lead to sample size requirements for estimation purpose that would be difficult to achieve. An approach based on weighting the contributions of the item responses to the log likelihood function has been suggested by Mislevy and Bock. This estimation approach has been shown to effectively reduce bias of ability estimates in the presence of response disturbances. However, this approach is prone to produce infinite ability estimates for unexpected response patterns in which correct answers are sparse. An alternative robust estimator of ability is suggested that does not appear to produce infinite estimates. Limited simulation studies show that the two estimators are equivalent when evaluated in terms of mean squared error.
12
Statistical Theories of Mental Test Scores
William W. Rozeboom, Frederic M. Lord, Melvin R. Novick et al. · American Educational Research Journal · 1969 · 8.1K citations
Malay Ghosh, George Casella, Roger L. Berger · Journal of the American Statistical Association · 1994 · 413 citations