This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Way, W. D. Articles by Forsyth, R. A. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

The Comparative Effects of Compensatory and Noncompensatory Two-Dimensional Data on Unidimensional IRT Estimates

University of Iowa

Timothy N. Ansley

University of Iowa

Robert A. Forsyth

University of Iowa

This study compared the effects of using a unidi mensional IRT model with two-dimensional data gener ated by noncompensatory and compensatory multidi mensional IRT models. Within each model, simulated datasets differed according to the degree of correlation between two vectors of parameters, ranging from 0 to .95. Results showed that the number-correct distri butions for each group of datasets were generally comparable, although factor analyses of tetrachoric correlations suggested that differences existed in the structure of the data from the two models. For the uni dimensional parameter estimates, it was found that the â values from the noncompensatory model appeared to be averages of the a₁ and a₂ values, while the â values from the compensatory model were best considered as an estimate of the sum of the a₁ and a₂ values. Con versely, the b values for the noncompensatory data were consistently greater than the b₁ values, while the b values from the compensatory model were best con sidered as the average of the b₁ and b₂ values. For both models the estimates were most highly related to the average of the two parameters. However, for the noncompensatory model there was a general in crease in the strength of this relationship with in creases in (₁, ₂). For the compensatory model, the strength of this relationship did not show a great deal of change with differences in (₁, ₂). Index terms: Compensatory multidimensional IRT models, Item response theory, Multidimensional IRT models, Noncompensatory multidimensional IRT models, Pa rameter estimation, Violations of unidimensionality.

Applied Psychological Measurement, Vol. 12, No. 3, 239-252 (1988)
DOI: 10.1177/014662168801200303


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. C. Immekus and P. K. Imbrie Dimensionality Assessment Using the Full-Information Item Bifactor Analysis for Graded Response Data: An Illustration With the State Metacognitive Inventory Educational and Psychological Measurement, August 1, 2008; 68(4): 695 - 709. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R.J. De Ayala The Influence of Multidimensionality on the Graded Response Model Applied Psychological Measurement, June 1, 1994; 18(2): 155 - 170. [Abstract] [PDF]

				V. G. Folk and B. F. Green Adaptive Estimation When the Unidimensionality Assumption of IRT is Violated Applied Psychological Measurement, December 1, 1989; 13(4): 373 - 390. [Abstract]

				T. A. Ackerman Unidimensional IRT Calibration of Compensatory and Noncompensatory Multidimensional Items Applied Psychological Measurement, June 1, 1989; 13(2): 113 - 127. [Abstract]