|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
|
Applied Psychological Measurement, Vol. 32, No. 4,
275-288 (2008)
DOI: 10.1177/0146621607302478
© 2008 SAGE Publications
Cognitive Diagnostic Attribute-Level Discrimination Indices
Robert Henson
University of North Carolina at Greensboro, rahenson{at}uncg.edu
Louis Roussos
Jeff Douglas
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Xuming He
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Cognitive diagnostic models (CDMs) model the probability of correctly answering an item as a function of an examinee's attribute mastery pattern. Because estimation of the mastery pattern involves more than a continuous measure of ability, reliability concepts introduced by classical test theory and item response theory do not apply. The cognitive diagnostic index (CDI) measures an item's overall discrimination power, which indicates an item's usefulness in examinee attribute pattern estimation. Because of its relationship with correct classification rates, the CDI was shown to be instrumental in cognitively diagnostic test assembly. This article generalizes the CDI to attribute-level discrimination indices for an item. Two different attribute-level discrimination indices are defined; their relationship with correct classification rates is explored using Monte Carlo simulations. There are strong relationships between the defined attribute indices and correct classification rates. Thus, one important potential application of these indices is test assembly from a CDM-calibrated item bank.
Key Words: cognitive diagnosis • cognitive diagnostic index • item discrimination index • Kullback-Leibler information
References
- Chang, H., & Ying, Z. (1996). A global information approach to computerized adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 20, 213-229.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- DiBello, L.V., Stout, W.F., & Roussos, L.A. (1995). Unified cognitive/psychometric diagnostic assessment likelihood-based classification techniques. In P. D. Nichols, D. F. Chipman, & R. L. Brennan (Eds.), Cognitively diagnostic assessment (pp. 361-389). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
- Haertel, E.H. (1989). Using restricted latent class models to map the skill structure of achievement items. Journal of Educational Measurement, 26, 333-352.
- Hartz, S. (2002). A Bayesian framework for the unified model for assessing cognitive abilities: Blending theory with practicality. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois.
- Henson, R. (2004). Test discrimination and test construction for cognitive diagnostic models. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois.
- Henson, R., & Douglas, J. (2005). Test construction for cognitive diagnostics. Applied Psychological Measurement, 29, 262-277.[Abstract]
- Junker, B.W., & Sijtsma, K. (2001). Cognitive assessment models with few assumptions, and connections with nonparametric item response theory. Applied Psychological Measurement, 25, 258-272.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Lord, F.M. (1980). Applications of item response theory to practical testing problems. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
- Lord, F., & Novick, M. (1968). Statistical theories of mental test scores with contributions from Alan Birnbaum. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
- Macready, G.B., & Dayton, C.M. (1977). The use of probabilistic models in the assessment of mastery. Journal of Education Statistics, 33, 379-416.
- Maris, E. (1999). Estimating multiple classification latent class models. Psychometrika, 64, 187-212.[CrossRef][ISI]
- Rindskopf, D. (1983). A general framework for using latent class analysis to test hierarchical and nonhierarchical learning models. Psychometrika, 48, 85-97.[CrossRef][ISI]
- Stout, W. (2002). Psychometrics: From practice to theory. Applied Psychological Measurement, 29, 262-277.[CrossRef]
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati What's this?
|
