Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to submit your manuscript to SPPS

Click here for more information on Research and Evaluation in Education and Psychology, 3e

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Applied Psychological Measurement
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Roskam, E. E.
Right arrow Articles by Jansen, P. G. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

The Mokken Scale: A Critical Discussion

Edward E. Roskam

University of Nijmegen

Arnold L. van den Wollenberg

University of Nijmegen

Paul G. W. Jansen

The Netherlands Postal and Telecommunications Services

The Mokken scale is critically discussed. It is ar gued that Loevinger's H, adapted by Mokken and ad vocated as a coefficient of scalability, is sensitive to properties of the item set which are extraneous to Mokken's requirement of holomorphy of item re sponse curves. Therefore, when defined in terms of H, the Mokken scale is ambiguous. It is furthermore ar gued that item-selection free statistical inferences con ceming the latent person order appear to be insuffi ciently based on double monotony alone, and that the Rasch model is the only item response model fulfilling this requirement. Finally, it is contended that the Mokken scale is an unfruitful compromise between the requirements of a Guttman scale and the requirements of classical test theory.

Applied Psychological Measurement, Vol. 10, No. 3, 265-277 (1986)
DOI: 10.1177/014662168601000305
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Applied Psychological MeasurementHome page
A. A. H. van Abswoude, J. K. Vermunt, and B. T. Hemker
Assessing Dimensionality by Maximizing H Coefficient-Based Objective Functions
Applied Psychological Measurement, July 1, 2007; 31(4): 308 - 330.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Applied Psychological MeasurementHome page
D. N. M. de Gruijter
Comparison of the Nonparametric Mokken Model and Parametric IRT Models Using Latent Class Analysis
Applied Psychological Measurement, March 1, 1994; 18(1): 27 - 34.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Applied Psychological MeasurementHome page
K. Sijtsma and R. R. Meijer
A Method for Investigating the Intersection of Item Response Functions in Mokken's Nonparametric IRT Model
Applied Psychological Measurement, June 1, 1992; 16(2): 149 - 157.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Applied Psychological MeasurementHome page
R. J. Mokken, C. Lewis, and K. Sijtsma
Rejoinder to "The Mokken Scale: A Critical Discussion"
Applied Psychological Measurement, September 1, 1986; 10(3): 279 - 285.
[Abstract]