Applied Psychological Measurement

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Free Access - Register Here

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
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
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Tate, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Applied Psychological Measurement, Vol. 27, No. 3, 159-203 (2003)
DOI: 10.1177/0146621603027003001

A Comparison of Selected Empirical Methods for Assessing the Structure of Responses to Test Items

Richard Tate

Florida State University

Selected methods of empirically assessing the structure of tests with dichotomous items were compared. The methods included both exploratory and confirmatory procedures from two different families, those based on parametric models and nonparametric methods based on conditional item covariances. The analysis conditions considered were typical of large-scale assessments, for example, the tests were composed of a relatively large number of items, and it was assumed that a relatively large sample size would be available for analysis. Comparisons of the methods were conducted for real data from a 62-item test of reading ability and for computer-generated data for multiple unidimensional and multidimensional cases. For the most part, all methods performed reasonably well over a relatively wide range of conditions. The several exceptions to this outcome occurred when the test data departed appreciably from the assumptions or inherent limitations associated with a method, for example, when guessing was present but not allowed for in the analysis or when the multidimensional test structure was nonsimple but the goal of the method was to estimate the amount of multidimensional simple structure. Index terms: test structure, test dimensionality, local item dependencies, test factors.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Educational and Psychological MeasurementHome page
W. Holmes Finch and B. F. French
Detection of Crossing Differential Item Functioning: A Comparison of Four Methods
Educational and Psychological Measurement, August 1, 2007; 67(4): 565 - 582.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Educational and Psychological MeasurementHome page
C. A. Stone and C.-C. Yeh
Assessing the Dimensionality and Factor Structure of Multiple-Choice Exams: An Empirical Comparison of Methods Using the Multistate Bar Examination
Educational and Psychological Measurement, April 1, 2006; 66(2): 193 - 214.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
J. Gerontol. B Psychol. Sci. Soc. Sci.Home page
R. P. Bowles, K. J. Grimm, and J. J. McArdle
A Structural Factor Analysis of Vocabulary Knowledge and Relations to Age
J. Gerontol. B. Psychol. Sci. Soc. Sci., September 1, 2005; 60(5): P234 - P241.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]