A Generalized Logistic Item Response Model Parameterizing Test Score Inappropriateness

The person response curve has been suggested as a possible model for test score inappropriateness (Lums den, 1977, 1978; Weiss, 1973). The two-parameter person response curve proposed by Lumsden includes a person slope parameter but abandons the notion of differential item relatedness to the underlying trait. As an alternative, a generalized logistic model is consid ered that includes all item parameters of the three- parameter logistic model (Birnbaum, 1968). In addi tion to the usual person location parameter, the model has extra person parameters representing two possible characterizations of test score inappropriateness: a slope parameter indicating the degree to which a per son responds differently to items of varying difficulty, and an asymptote parameter measuring a person's pro clivity to engage in effective guessing or to omit items in the presence of partial information. To assess the model's feasibility, statistical comparisons were made between parameter estimates from data simulated ac cording to the model and the original simulation parameters. The results seem encouraging, but addi tional empirical study is needed before firm conclu sions can be drawn.

[1]  F. Lord.  Applications of Item Response Theory To Practical Testing Problems , 1980 .

[2]  David J. Weiss,et al.  A Study of Computer-Administered Stradaptive Ability Testing. Research Report 75-4. , 1975 .

[3]  Benjamin D. Wright,et al.  Solving measurement problems with the Rasch model. , 1977 .

[4]  Fritz Drasgow,et al.  Appropriateness measurement with polychotomous item response models and standardized indices , 1984 .

[5]  Frederic E. Fischer,et al.  An Index of an Individual's Agreement with Group-Determined Item Difficulties , 1968 .

[6]  B. Wright,et al.  Best test design , 1979 .

[7]  Kikumi K. Tatsuoka,et al.  Indices for Detecting Unusual Patterns: Links Between Two General Approaches and Potential Applications , 1983 .

[8]  Joseph L. Zinnes,et al.  Theory and Methods of Scaling. , 1958 .

[9]  Fritz Drasgow,et al.  Recovery of Two- and Three-Parameter Logistic Item Characteristic Curves: A Monte Carlo Study , 1982 .

[10]  David J. Weiss.  The Stratified Adaptive Computerized Ability Test. , 1973 .

[11]  Michael V. LeVine,et al.  Appropriateness measurement: Review, critique and validating studies , 1982 .

[12]  Kikumi K. Tatsuoka,et al.  Detection of Aberrant Response Patterns and their Effect on Dimensionality , 1982 .

[13]  Melvin R. Novick,et al.  Some latent train models and their use in inferring an examinee's ability , 1966 .

[14]  David J Weiss,et al.  The Person Response Curve: Fit of Individuals to Item Characteristic Curve Models , 1979 .

[15]  David J. Weiss,et al.  The Person Response Curve: Fit of Individuals to Item Response Theory Models , 1983 .

[16]  Fritz Drasgow,et al.  Item response theory : application to psychological measurement , 1983 .

[17]  James Lumsden.  Tests are perfectly reliable , 1978 .

[18]  D. Andrich.  Relationships Between the Thurstone and Rasch Approaches to Item Scaling , 1978 .

[19]  J. Lumsden.  Variations on a Theme by Thurstone , 1980 .

[20]  J. Lumsden,et al.  Person Reliability , 1977 .

[21]  M. R. Novick,et al.  Statistical Theories of Mental Test Scores. , 1971 .

[22]  Malcolm James Ree,et al.  Estimating Item Characteristic Curves , 1979 .

[23]  Roger Fletcher,et al.  FORTRAN subroutines for minimization by quasi-Newton methods , 1972 .

[24]  Donald B. Rubin,et al.  Measuring the Appropriateness of Multiple-Choice Test Scores , 1979 .

[25]  Fritz Drasgow,et al.  Choice of Test Model for Appropriateness Measurement , 1982 .