An Examination of Different Methods of Setting Cutoff Values in Person Fit Research

IF 1 Q2 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY International Journal of Testing Pub Date : 2019-01-02 DOI:10.1080/15305058.2018.1464010
A. Mousavi, Ying Cui, Todd Rogers
{"title":"An Examination of Different Methods of Setting Cutoff Values in Person Fit Research","authors":"A. Mousavi, Ying Cui, Todd Rogers","doi":"10.1080/15305058.2018.1464010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This simulation study evaluates four different methods of setting cutoff values for person fit assessment, including (a) using fixed cutoff values either from theoretical distributions of person fit statistics, or arbitrarily chosen by the researchers in the literature; (b) using the specific percentile rank of empirical sampling distribution of person fit statistics from simulated fitting responses; (c) using bootstrap method to estimate cutoff values of empirical sampling distribution of person fit statistics from simulated fitting responses; and (d) using the p-value methods to identify misfitting responses conditional on ability levels. The Snijders' (2001), as an index with known theoretical distribution, van der Flier's U3 (1982) and Sijtsma's HT coefficient (1986), as indices with unknown theoretical distribution, were chosen. According to the simulation results, different methods of setting cutoff values tend to produce different levels of Type I error and detection rates, indicating it is critical to select an appropriate method for setting cutoff values in person fit research.","PeriodicalId":46615,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Testing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/15305058.2018.1464010","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Testing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15305058.2018.1464010","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

This simulation study evaluates four different methods of setting cutoff values for person fit assessment, including (a) using fixed cutoff values either from theoretical distributions of person fit statistics, or arbitrarily chosen by the researchers in the literature; (b) using the specific percentile rank of empirical sampling distribution of person fit statistics from simulated fitting responses; (c) using bootstrap method to estimate cutoff values of empirical sampling distribution of person fit statistics from simulated fitting responses; and (d) using the p-value methods to identify misfitting responses conditional on ability levels. The Snijders' (2001), as an index with known theoretical distribution, van der Flier's U3 (1982) and Sijtsma's HT coefficient (1986), as indices with unknown theoretical distribution, were chosen. According to the simulation results, different methods of setting cutoff values tend to produce different levels of Type I error and detection rates, indicating it is critical to select an appropriate method for setting cutoff values in person fit research.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对适合度研究中设定临界值的不同方法的考察
该模拟研究评估了四种不同的设定截断值的方法,包括(a)使用固定的截断值,或者从理论分布的人适合统计,或者由研究人员在文献中任意选择;(b)利用模拟拟合反应的人拟合统计量的经验抽样分布的特定百分位数秩;(c)利用自举法从模拟拟合响应中估计人拟合统计量经验抽样分布的截止值;(d)使用p值方法识别以能力水平为条件的错拟合反应。选用理论分布已知的指标Snijders’s(2001),理论分布未知的指标van der Flier’s U3(1982)和Sijtsma’s HT系数(1986)。仿真结果表明,不同的截止值设置方法往往会产生不同程度的I型误差和检出率,这表明在人身拟合研究中选择合适的截止值设置方法至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
International Journal of Testing
International Journal of Testing SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
11.80%
发文量
13
期刊最新文献
Combining Mokken Scale Analysis with and rasch measurement theory to explore differences in measurement quality between subgroups Examining the construct validity of the MIDUS version of the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire (MPQ) Where nonresponse is at its loudest: Cross-country and individual differences in item nonresponse across the PISA 2018 student questionnaire The choice between cognitive diagnosis and item response theory: A case study from medical education Beyond group comparisons: Accounting for intersectional sources of bias in international survey measures
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1