Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

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

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
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 Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Beller, M.
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?

Tree Versus Geometric Representation of Tests and Items

Michal Beller

National Institute for Testing and Evaluation, Israel

Factor-analytic techniques and multidimensional scaling models are the traditional ways of representing the interrelations among tests and items. Both can be classified as geometric approaches. This study at tempted to broaden the scope of models traditionally used, and to apply an additive tree model (ADDTREE) that belongs to the family of network models. Correla tion matrices were obtained from three studies and were analyzed using two representation models: Smallest Space Analysis (ssA), which is a multidimen sional scaling model, and ADDTREE. The results of both analyses were compared for the two criteria of goodness of fit and interpretability. To enable a com parison with the more traditional factor-analytic ap proach, the data were also subjected to principal com ponents analyses. ADDTREE fared better in both comparisons. Moreover, ADDTREE lends itself readily to an interpretation in terms of hierarchical cluster structure, whereas it is difficult to interpret SSA's di mensions. ADDTREE'S close fit to the data and its co herence of presentation make it a convenient means of representing tests and items. Index terms: additive trees, ADDTREE, factor analysis, hierarchical cluster ing, multidimensional scaling, Smallest Space Analy sis.

Applied Psychological Measurement, Vol. 14, No. 1, 13-28 (1990)
DOI: 10.1177/014662169001400102
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?