在多组中建立测量不变性的加权项目拟合统计的替代方法

IF 1.9 3区 心理学 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics Pub Date : 2023-07-04 DOI:10.3102/10769986231183326
Sean Joo, Montserrat Valdivia, Dubravka Svetina Valdivia, Leslie Rutkowski
{"title":"在多组中建立测量不变性的加权项目拟合统计的替代方法","authors":"Sean Joo, Montserrat Valdivia, Dubravka Svetina Valdivia, Leslie Rutkowski","doi":"10.3102/10769986231183326","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Evaluating scale comparability in international large-scale assessments depends on measurement invariance (MI). The root mean square deviation (RMSD) is a standard method for establishing MI in several programs, such as the Programme for International Student Assessment and the Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies. Previous research showed that the RMSD was unable to detect departures from MI when the latent trait distribution was far from item difficulty. In this study, we developed three alternative approaches to the original RMSD: equal, item information, and b-norm weighted RMSDs. Specifically, we considered the item-centered normalized weight distributions to compute the item characteristic curve difference in the RMSD procedure more efficiently. We further compared all methods’ performance via a simulation study and the item information and b-norm weighted RMSDs showed the most promising results. An empirical example is demonstrated, and implications for researchers are discussed.","PeriodicalId":48001,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Alternatives to Weighted Item Fit Statistics for Establishing Measurement Invariance in Many Groups\",\"authors\":\"Sean Joo, Montserrat Valdivia, Dubravka Svetina Valdivia, Leslie Rutkowski\",\"doi\":\"10.3102/10769986231183326\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Evaluating scale comparability in international large-scale assessments depends on measurement invariance (MI). The root mean square deviation (RMSD) is a standard method for establishing MI in several programs, such as the Programme for International Student Assessment and the Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies. Previous research showed that the RMSD was unable to detect departures from MI when the latent trait distribution was far from item difficulty. In this study, we developed three alternative approaches to the original RMSD: equal, item information, and b-norm weighted RMSDs. Specifically, we considered the item-centered normalized weight distributions to compute the item characteristic curve difference in the RMSD procedure more efficiently. We further compared all methods’ performance via a simulation study and the item information and b-norm weighted RMSDs showed the most promising results. An empirical example is demonstrated, and implications for researchers are discussed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48001,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3102/10769986231183326\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3102/10769986231183326","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

在国际大规模评估中评估量表的可比性取决于测量不变性。均方根偏差(RMSD)是几个项目中建立MI的标准方法,如国际学生评估计划和国际成人能力评估计划。先前的研究表明,当潜在特征分布远离项目难度时,RMSD无法检测出MI的偏离。在这项研究中,我们开发了三种替代原始RMSD的方法:相等、项目信息和b-范数加权RMSD。具体来说,我们考虑了以项目为中心的归一化权重分布,以更有效地计算RMSD过程中的项目特征曲线差异。我们通过模拟研究进一步比较了所有方法的性能,项目信息和b-范数加权RMSD显示出最有希望的结果。通过一个实证例子,讨论了对研究者的启示。
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
Alternatives to Weighted Item Fit Statistics for Establishing Measurement Invariance in Many Groups
Evaluating scale comparability in international large-scale assessments depends on measurement invariance (MI). The root mean square deviation (RMSD) is a standard method for establishing MI in several programs, such as the Programme for International Student Assessment and the Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies. Previous research showed that the RMSD was unable to detect departures from MI when the latent trait distribution was far from item difficulty. In this study, we developed three alternative approaches to the original RMSD: equal, item information, and b-norm weighted RMSDs. Specifically, we considered the item-centered normalized weight distributions to compute the item characteristic curve difference in the RMSD procedure more efficiently. We further compared all methods’ performance via a simulation study and the item information and b-norm weighted RMSDs showed the most promising results. An empirical example is demonstrated, and implications for researchers are discussed.
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
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
4.20%
发文量
21
期刊介绍: Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, sponsored jointly by the American Educational Research Association and the American Statistical Association, publishes articles that are original and provide methods that are useful to those studying problems and issues in educational or behavioral research. Typical papers introduce new methods of analysis. Critical reviews of current practice, tutorial presentations of less well known methods, and novel applications of already-known methods are also of interest. Papers discussing statistical techniques without specific educational or behavioral interest or focusing on substantive results without developing new statistical methods or models or making novel use of existing methods have lower priority. Simulation studies, either to demonstrate properties of an existing method or to compare several existing methods (without providing a new method), also have low priority. The Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics provides an outlet for papers that are original and provide methods that are useful to those studying problems and issues in educational or behavioral research. Typical papers introduce new methods of analysis, provide properties of these methods, and an example of use in education or behavioral research. Critical reviews of current practice, tutorial presentations of less well known methods, and novel applications of already-known methods are also sometimes accepted. Papers discussing statistical techniques without specific educational or behavioral interest or focusing on substantive results without developing new statistical methods or models or making novel use of existing methods have lower priority. Simulation studies, either to demonstrate properties of an existing method or to compare several existing methods (without providing a new method), also have low priority.
期刊最新文献
Improving Balance in Educational Measurement: A Legacy of E. F. Lindquist A Simple Technique Assessing Ordinal and Disordinal Interaction Effects A Comparison of Latent Semantic Analysis and Latent Dirichlet Allocation in Educational Measurement Sample Size Calculation and Optimal Design for Multivariate Regression-Based Norming Corrigendum to Power Approximations for Overall Average Effects in Meta-Analysis With Dependent Effect Sizes
×
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