Applied Psychological Measurement

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

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 Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
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
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Finch, H.
Right arrow Articles by Habing, B.
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. 31, No. 4, 292-307 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/0146621606294490

Performance of DIMTEST- and NOHARM-Based Statistics for Testing Unidimensionality

Holmes Finch

Ball State University, whfinch{at}bsu.edu

Brian Habing

University of South Carolina

This Monte Carlo study compares the ability of the parametric bootstrap version of DIMTEST with three goodness-of-fit tests calculated from a fitted NOHARM model to detect violations of the assumption of unidimensionality in testing data. The effectiveness of the procedures was evaluated for different numbers of items, numbers of examinees, correlations between underlying ability dimensions, skewness of underlying ability distributions, and the presence or absence of a guessing parameter. In the absence of guessing, DIMTEST and the NOHARM-based statistics had similar power, with the {chi}2 statistic having a very low Type I error rate. In the presence of guessing, however, two of the NOHARM-based statistics had unacceptably high Type I error rates, while the third performed similarly to DIMTEST. Given this inflated error rate, the study compares the empirical powers after adjusting for the discrepancy in Type I error rates.

Key Words: Index terms: DIMTEST • NOHARM • item response theory • dimensionality • multidimensionality • unidimensionality


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?