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 Stone, C. A. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Recovery of Marginal Maximum Likelihood Estimates in the Two-Parameter Logistic Response Model: An Evaluation of MULTILOG

University of Pittsburgh

Marginal maximum likelihood (MML) estimation of the logistic response model assumes a structure for the distribution of ability (8). If this assump tion is incorrect, the statistical properties of MML estimates may not hold. Monte carlo methods were used to evaluate MML estimation of item param eters and maximum likelihood (ML) estimates of in the two-parameter logistic model for varying test lengths, sample sizes, and assumed dis tribution. 100 datasets were generated for each of the combinations of factors, allowing for item-level analyses based on means across replications. MML estimates of item difficulty were generally precise and stable in small samples, short tests, and under varying distributional assumptions of . When the true distribution of was normal, MML estimates of item discrimination were also gen erally precise and stable. ML estimates of were generally precise and stable, although the distribu tion of estimates was platykurtic and truncated at the high and low ends of the score range.

Key Words: Index terms: marginal maximum likelihood, monte carlo • MULTILOG • two-parameter logistic response model.

Applied Psychological Measurement, Vol. 16, No. 1, 1-16 (1992)
DOI: 10.1177/014662169201600101


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

This article has been cited by other articles:

				C. M. Woods Likelihood-Ratio DIF Testing: Effects of Nonnormality Applied Psychological Measurement, October 1, 2008; 32(7): 511 - 526. [Abstract] [PDF]

				C. M. Woods Ramsay-Curve Item Response Theory for the Three-Parameter Logistic Item Response Model Applied Psychological Measurement, September 1, 2008; 32(6): 447 - 465. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S.-M. Kang and N. G. Waller Moderated Multiple Regression, Spurious Interaction Effects, and IRT Applied Psychological Measurement, March 1, 2005; 29(2): 87 - 105. [Abstract] [PDF]

				E. J. C. G. van den Oord Estimating Johnson Curve Population Distributions in MULTILOG Applied Psychological Measurement, January 1, 2005; 29(1): 45 - 64. [Abstract] [PDF]

				L. Kirisci, T.-c. Hsu, and L. Yu Robustness of Item Parameter Estimation Programs to Assumptions of Unidimensionality and Normality Applied Psychological Measurement, June 1, 2001; 25(2): 146 - 162. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. R. Harwell and G. G. Gatti Rescaling Ordinal Data to Interval Data in Educational Research Review of Educational Research, January 1, 2001; 71(1): 105 - 131. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. Harwell, C. A. Stone, T.-C. Hsu, and L. Kirisci Monte Carlo Studies in Item Response Theory Applied Psychological Measurement, June 1, 1996; 20(2): 101 - 125. [Abstract] [PDF]

				P. J. Ferrando Fitting Item Response Models to the Epi-A Impulsivity Sub Scale Educational and Psychological Measurement, March 1, 1994; 54(1): 118 - 127. [Abstract]