当一个或多个多同构项目的所有回答都缺失时的计分方法:准确性和对心理测量属性的影响

Q3 Social Sciences ETS Research Report Series Pub Date : 2023-05-04 DOI:10.1002/ets2.12369
Yanxuan Qu, Sandip Sinharay
{"title":"当一个或多个多同构项目的所有回答都缺失时的计分方法:准确性和对心理测量属性的影响","authors":"Yanxuan Qu,&nbsp;Sandip Sinharay","doi":"10.1002/ets2.12369","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Though a substantial amount of research exists on imputing missing scores in educational assessments, there is little research on cases where responses or scores to an item are missing for all test takers. In this paper, we tackled the problem of imputing missing scores for tests for which the responses to an item are missing for all test takers. We considered three missing-data imputation methods—the median method, the item response theory (IRT) method, and the two-way method—for imputing scores. We compared the performance of these three imputation methods with respect to their accuracy in estimating scaled scores and test reliability for the aforementioned problem. Real data were used in the comparison. All three methods performed well in imputing scaled scores with negligible imputation error: The IRT method and the median method provided slightly more accurate scaled scores. The two-way method provided the most accurate reliability estimates. Recommendations for practice are provided.</p>","PeriodicalId":11972,"journal":{"name":"ETS Research Report Series","volume":"2023 1","pages":"1-7"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ets2.12369","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Methods for Imputing Scores When All Responses Are Missing for One or More Polytomous Items: Accuracy and Impact on Psychometric Property\",\"authors\":\"Yanxuan Qu,&nbsp;Sandip Sinharay\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/ets2.12369\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Though a substantial amount of research exists on imputing missing scores in educational assessments, there is little research on cases where responses or scores to an item are missing for all test takers. In this paper, we tackled the problem of imputing missing scores for tests for which the responses to an item are missing for all test takers. We considered three missing-data imputation methods—the median method, the item response theory (IRT) method, and the two-way method—for imputing scores. We compared the performance of these three imputation methods with respect to their accuracy in estimating scaled scores and test reliability for the aforementioned problem. Real data were used in the comparison. All three methods performed well in imputing scaled scores with negligible imputation error: The IRT method and the median method provided slightly more accurate scaled scores. The two-way method provided the most accurate reliability estimates. Recommendations for practice are provided.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11972,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ETS Research Report Series\",\"volume\":\"2023 1\",\"pages\":\"1-7\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ets2.12369\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ETS Research Report Series\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ets2.12369\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ETS Research Report Series","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ets2.12369","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

尽管目前已有大量关于教育评估中缺失分数归因的研究,但对于所有应试者对某个项目的回答或分数都缺失的情况却鲜有研究。在本文中,我们探讨了在所有应试者对某个项目的回答都缺失的测试中如何估算缺失分数的问题。我们考虑了三种缺失数据估算方法--中值法、项目反应理论(IRT)法和双向法--来估算分数。我们比较了这三种估算方法在估算上述问题的比例分数和测验信度方面的准确性。比较中使用了真实数据。所有三种方法在估算比例分数时都表现良好,估算误差可以忽略不计:IRT 法和中位数法提供的比例分数准确度稍高。双向法提供了最准确的信度估计。本文提出了一些实践建议。
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
Methods for Imputing Scores When All Responses Are Missing for One or More Polytomous Items: Accuracy and Impact on Psychometric Property

Though a substantial amount of research exists on imputing missing scores in educational assessments, there is little research on cases where responses or scores to an item are missing for all test takers. In this paper, we tackled the problem of imputing missing scores for tests for which the responses to an item are missing for all test takers. We considered three missing-data imputation methods—the median method, the item response theory (IRT) method, and the two-way method—for imputing scores. We compared the performance of these three imputation methods with respect to their accuracy in estimating scaled scores and test reliability for the aforementioned problem. Real data were used in the comparison. All three methods performed well in imputing scaled scores with negligible imputation error: The IRT method and the median method provided slightly more accurate scaled scores. The two-way method provided the most accurate reliability estimates. Recommendations for practice are provided.

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
ETS Research Report Series
ETS Research Report Series Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
期刊最新文献
Building a Validity Argument for the TOEFL Junior® Tests Validity, Reliability, and Fairness Evidence for the JD‐Next Exam Practical Considerations in Item Calibration With Small Samples Under Multistage Test Design: A Case Study Practical Considerations in Item Calibration With Small Samples Under Multistage Test Design: A Case Study Modeling Writing Traits in a Formative Essay Corpus
×
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