Adaptive Testing With a Hierarchical Item Response Theory Model

The hierarchical item response theory (H-IRT) model is very flexible and allows a general factor and subfactors within an overall structure of two or more levels. When an H-IRT model with a large number of dimensions is used for an adaptive test, the computational burden associated with interim scoring and selection of subsequent items is heavy. An alternative approach for any high-dimension adaptive test is to reduce dimensionality for interim scoring and item selection and then revert to full dimensionality for final score reporting, thereby significantly reducing the computational burden. This study compared the accuracy and efficiency of final scoring for multidimensional, local multidimensional, and unidimensional item selection and interim scoring methods, using both simulated and real item pools. The simulation study was conducted under 10 conditions (i.e., five test lengths and two H-IRT models) with a simulated sample of 10,000 students. The study with the real item pool was conducted using item parameters from an actual 45-item adaptive test with a simulated sample of 10,000 students. Results indicate that the theta estimations provided by the local multidimensional and unidimensional item selection and interim scoring methods were relatively as accurate as the theta estimation provided by the multidimensional item selection and interim scoring method, especially during the real item pool study. In addition, the multidimensional method required the longest computation time and the unidimensional method required the shortest computation time.

[1]  F. Samejima Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores , 1969 .

[2]  Neal M. Kingston,et al.  Assessing the Structure of the GRE General Test Using Confirmatory Multidimensional Item Response Theory. , 1988 .

[3]  Hung-Yu Huang,et al.  Computerized Adaptive Testing Using a Class of High-Order Item Response Theory Models , 2012 .

[4]  Frank Rijmen,et al.  Hierarchical factor item response theory models for PIRLS: capturing clustering effects at multiple levels , 2011 .

[5]  Identifiers California,et al.  Annual Meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education , 1998 .

[6]  Bernard P. Veldkamp,et al.  Multidimensional adaptive testing with constraints on test content , 2002 .

[7]  Ellen Frank,et al.  Computerized Adaptive Diagnosis and Testing of Mental Health Disorders. , 2016, Annual review of clinical psychology.

[8]  Daniel O. Segall,et al.  General ability measurement: An application of multidimensional item response theory , 2001 .

[9]  D. Seo Application of the Bifactor Model to Computerized Adaptive Testing. , 2011 .

[10]  van der Linden,et al.  Constrained adaptive testing with shadow tests , 2000 .

[11]  D. Weiss,et al.  Best Design for Multidimensional Computerized Adaptive Testing With the Bifactor Model , 2015, Educational and psychological measurement.

[12]  Willem J. van der Linden,et al.  Multidimensional Adaptive Testing with a Minimum Error-Variance Criterion , 1999 .

[13]  Wen-Chung Wang,et al.  Implementation and Measurement Efficiency of Multidimensional Computerized Adaptive Testing , 2004 .

[14]  Daniel O. Segall,et al.  Multidimensional adaptive testing , 1996 .

[15]  Hua-Hua Chang,et al.  The maximum priority index method for severely constrained item selection in computerized adaptive testing. , 2009, The British journal of mathematical and statistical psychology.

[16]  Donald Hedeker,et al.  Full-information item bi-factor analysis , 1992 .

[17]  Hua-Hua Chang,et al.  A Global Information Approach to Computerized Adaptive Testing , 1996 .

[18]  David J. Weiss,et al.  Using computerized adaptive testing to reduce the burden of mental health assessment. , 2008, Psychiatric services.

[19]  David Thissen,et al.  On the relationship between the higher-order factor model and the hierarchical factor model , 1999 .

[20]  Hua-Hua Chang,et al.  Psychometrics Behind Computerized Adaptive Testing , 2015, Psychometrika.

[21]  Chun Wang,et al.  Improving Measurement Precision of Hierarchical Latent Traits Using Adaptive Testing , 2014 .

[22]  Wim J. van der Linden,et al.  A Model for Optimal Constrained Adaptive Testing , 1998 .

[23]  Lihua Yao,et al.  Using Multidimensional CAT to Administer a Short, Yet Precise, Screening Test , 2014 .

[24]  Wim J. van der Linden,et al.  Multidimensional Adaptive Testing with Optimal Design Criteria for Item Selection , 2008, Psychometrika.

[25]  Hua-Hua Chang,et al.  Kullback–Leibler Information and Its Applications in Multi-Dimensional Adaptive Testing , 2011 .