{"title":"项目特征曲线不对称:比四参数模型更好地适应滑移和猜测?","authors":"Xiangyi Liao, D. Bolt","doi":"10.3102/10769986211003283","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Four-parameter models have received increasing psychometric attention in recent years, as a reduced upper asymptote for item characteristic curves can be appealing for measurement applications such as adaptive testing and person-fit assessment. However, applications can be challenging due to the large number of parameters in the model. In this article, we demonstrate in the context of mathematics assessments how the slip and guess parameters of a four-parameter model may often be empirically related. This observation also has a psychological explanation to the extent that both asymptote parameters may be manifestations of a single item complexity characteristic. The relationship between lower and upper asymptotes motivates the consideration of an asymmetric item response theory model as a three-parameter alternative to the four-parameter model. Using actual response data from mathematics multiple-choice tests, we demonstrate the empirical superiority of a three-parameter asymmetric model in several standardized tests of mathematics. To the extent that a model of asymmetry ultimately portrays slips and guesses not as purely random but rather as proficiency-related phenomena, we argue that the asymmetric approach may also have greater psychological plausibility.","PeriodicalId":48001,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics","volume":"46 1","pages":"753 - 775"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Item Characteristic Curve Asymmetry: A Better Way to Accommodate Slips and Guesses Than a Four-Parameter Model?\",\"authors\":\"Xiangyi Liao, D. Bolt\",\"doi\":\"10.3102/10769986211003283\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Four-parameter models have received increasing psychometric attention in recent years, as a reduced upper asymptote for item characteristic curves can be appealing for measurement applications such as adaptive testing and person-fit assessment. However, applications can be challenging due to the large number of parameters in the model. In this article, we demonstrate in the context of mathematics assessments how the slip and guess parameters of a four-parameter model may often be empirically related. This observation also has a psychological explanation to the extent that both asymptote parameters may be manifestations of a single item complexity characteristic. The relationship between lower and upper asymptotes motivates the consideration of an asymmetric item response theory model as a three-parameter alternative to the four-parameter model. Using actual response data from mathematics multiple-choice tests, we demonstrate the empirical superiority of a three-parameter asymmetric model in several standardized tests of mathematics. To the extent that a model of asymmetry ultimately portrays slips and guesses not as purely random but rather as proficiency-related phenomena, we argue that the asymmetric approach may also have greater psychological plausibility.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48001,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics\",\"volume\":\"46 1\",\"pages\":\"753 - 775\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-03-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3102/10769986211003283\",\"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/10.3102/10769986211003283","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}
Item Characteristic Curve Asymmetry: A Better Way to Accommodate Slips and Guesses Than a Four-Parameter Model?
Four-parameter models have received increasing psychometric attention in recent years, as a reduced upper asymptote for item characteristic curves can be appealing for measurement applications such as adaptive testing and person-fit assessment. However, applications can be challenging due to the large number of parameters in the model. In this article, we demonstrate in the context of mathematics assessments how the slip and guess parameters of a four-parameter model may often be empirically related. This observation also has a psychological explanation to the extent that both asymptote parameters may be manifestations of a single item complexity characteristic. The relationship between lower and upper asymptotes motivates the consideration of an asymmetric item response theory model as a three-parameter alternative to the four-parameter model. Using actual response data from mathematics multiple-choice tests, we demonstrate the empirical superiority of a three-parameter asymmetric model in several standardized tests of mathematics. To the extent that a model of asymmetry ultimately portrays slips and guesses not as purely random but rather as proficiency-related phenomena, we argue that the asymmetric approach may also have greater psychological plausibility.
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.