广义系数置信区间方法的蒙特卡罗研究。

IF 2.1 3区 心理学 Q2 MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS Educational and Psychological Measurement Pub Date : 2022-08-01 DOI:10.1177/00131644211033899
Zhehan Jiang, Mark Raymond, Christine DiStefano, Dexin Shi, Ren Liu, Junhua Sun
{"title":"广义系数置信区间方法的蒙特卡罗研究。","authors":"Zhehan Jiang,&nbsp;Mark Raymond,&nbsp;Christine DiStefano,&nbsp;Dexin Shi,&nbsp;Ren Liu,&nbsp;Junhua Sun","doi":"10.1177/00131644211033899","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Computing confidence intervals around generalizability coefficients has long been a challenging task in generalizability theory. This is a serious practical problem because generalizability coefficients are often computed from designs where some facets have small sample sizes, and researchers have little guide regarding the trustworthiness of the coefficients. As generalizability theory can be framed to a linear mixed-effect model (LMM), bootstrap and simulation techniques from LMM paradigm can be used to construct the confidence intervals. The purpose of this research is to examine four different LMM-based methods for computing the confidence intervals that have been proposed and to determine their accuracy under six simulated conditions based on the type of test scores (normal, dichotomous, and polytomous data) and data measurement design (<i>p</i>×<i>i</i>×<i>r</i> and <i>p</i>× [<i>i:r</i>]). A bootstrap technique called \"parametric methods with spherical random effects\" consistently produced more accurate confidence intervals than the three other LMM-based methods. Furthermore, the selected technique was compared with model-based approach to investigate the performance at the levels of variance components via the second simulation study, where the numbers of examines, raters, and items were varied. We conclude with the recommendation generalizability coefficients, the confidence interval should accompany the point estimate.</p>","PeriodicalId":11502,"journal":{"name":"Educational and Psychological Measurement","volume":"82 4","pages":"705-718"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9228698/pdf/10.1177_00131644211033899.pdf","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Monte Carlo Study of Confidence Interval Methods for Generalizability Coefficient.\",\"authors\":\"Zhehan Jiang,&nbsp;Mark Raymond,&nbsp;Christine DiStefano,&nbsp;Dexin Shi,&nbsp;Ren Liu,&nbsp;Junhua Sun\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00131644211033899\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Computing confidence intervals around generalizability coefficients has long been a challenging task in generalizability theory. This is a serious practical problem because generalizability coefficients are often computed from designs where some facets have small sample sizes, and researchers have little guide regarding the trustworthiness of the coefficients. As generalizability theory can be framed to a linear mixed-effect model (LMM), bootstrap and simulation techniques from LMM paradigm can be used to construct the confidence intervals. The purpose of this research is to examine four different LMM-based methods for computing the confidence intervals that have been proposed and to determine their accuracy under six simulated conditions based on the type of test scores (normal, dichotomous, and polytomous data) and data measurement design (<i>p</i>×<i>i</i>×<i>r</i> and <i>p</i>× [<i>i:r</i>]). A bootstrap technique called \\\"parametric methods with spherical random effects\\\" consistently produced more accurate confidence intervals than the three other LMM-based methods. Furthermore, the selected technique was compared with model-based approach to investigate the performance at the levels of variance components via the second simulation study, where the numbers of examines, raters, and items were varied. We conclude with the recommendation generalizability coefficients, the confidence interval should accompany the point estimate.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11502,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Educational and Psychological Measurement\",\"volume\":\"82 4\",\"pages\":\"705-718\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9228698/pdf/10.1177_00131644211033899.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Educational and Psychological Measurement\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00131644211033899\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational and Psychological Measurement","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00131644211033899","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

计算可泛化系数周围的置信区间一直是可泛化理论中一个具有挑战性的课题。这是一个严重的实际问题,因为泛化系数通常是从设计中计算出来的,其中一些方面的样本量很小,研究人员对系数的可信度几乎没有指导。由于泛化理论可以被框架化为线性混合效应模型(LMM),因此可以使用LMM范式中的自举和仿真技术来构建置信区间。本研究的目的是检验四种不同的基于lmm的方法,用于计算已提出的置信区间,并根据测试分数类型(正常,二分类和多分类数据)和数据测量设计(p×i×r和px [i:r])确定其在六种模拟条件下的准确性。一种称为“具有球形随机效应的参数方法”的自举技术始终比其他三种基于lmm的方法产生更准确的置信区间。此外,通过第二次模拟研究,将所选技术与基于模型的方法进行比较,以调查方差成分水平上的表现,其中检查,评分者和项目的数量是不同的。我们得出结论,推荐泛化系数,置信区间应伴随点估计。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
A Monte Carlo Study of Confidence Interval Methods for Generalizability Coefficient.

Computing confidence intervals around generalizability coefficients has long been a challenging task in generalizability theory. This is a serious practical problem because generalizability coefficients are often computed from designs where some facets have small sample sizes, and researchers have little guide regarding the trustworthiness of the coefficients. As generalizability theory can be framed to a linear mixed-effect model (LMM), bootstrap and simulation techniques from LMM paradigm can be used to construct the confidence intervals. The purpose of this research is to examine four different LMM-based methods for computing the confidence intervals that have been proposed and to determine their accuracy under six simulated conditions based on the type of test scores (normal, dichotomous, and polytomous data) and data measurement design (p×i×r and p× [i:r]). A bootstrap technique called "parametric methods with spherical random effects" consistently produced more accurate confidence intervals than the three other LMM-based methods. Furthermore, the selected technique was compared with model-based approach to investigate the performance at the levels of variance components via the second simulation study, where the numbers of examines, raters, and items were varied. We conclude with the recommendation generalizability coefficients, the confidence interval should accompany the point estimate.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Educational and Psychological Measurement
Educational and Psychological Measurement 医学-数学跨学科应用
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
7.40%
发文量
49
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Educational and Psychological Measurement (EPM) publishes referred scholarly work from all academic disciplines interested in the study of measurement theory, problems, and issues. Theoretical articles address new developments and techniques, and applied articles deal with innovation applications.
期刊最新文献
Discriminant Validity of Interval Response Formats: Investigating the Dimensional Structure of Interval Widths. Novick Meets Bayes: Improving the Assessment of Individual Students in Educational Practice and Research by Capitalizing on Assessors' Prior Beliefs. Differential Item Functioning Effect Size Use for Validity Information. Optimal Number of Replications for Obtaining Stable Dynamic Fit Index Cutoffs. Invariance: What Does Measurement Invariance Allow Us to Claim?
×
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