首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Applied Psychological Measurement >Evaluating Testing Profile Likelihood Confidence IntervalEstimation and Model Comparisons for Item Covariate Effects in Linear LogisticTest Models
【2h】

Evaluating Testing Profile Likelihood Confidence IntervalEstimation and Model Comparisons for Item Covariate Effects in Linear LogisticTest Models

机译:评估测试轮廓可能性置信区间线性Logistic中项目协变量效应的估计和模型比较测试模型

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

The linear logistic test model (LLTM) has been widely applied to investigate the effects of item covariates on item difficulty. The LLTM was extended with random item residuals to account for item differences not explained by the item covariates. This extended LLTM is called the LLTM-R. In this article, statistical inference methods are investigated for these two models. Type I error rates and power are compared via Monte Carlo studies. Based on the simulation results, the use of the likelihood ratio test (LRT) is recommended over the paired-sample t test based on sum scores, the Wald z test, and information criteria, and the LRT is recommended over the profile likelihood confidence interval because of the simplicity of the LRT. In addition, it is concluded that the LLTM-R is the better general model approach. Inferences based on the LLTM while the LLTM-R is the true model appear to be largely biased in the liberal way, while inferences based on the LLTM-R while the LLTM is the true model are only biased in a very minor and conservative way. Furthermore, in the absence of residual variance, Type I error rate and power were acceptable except for power when the number of items is small (10 items) and also the number of persons is small (200 persons).In the presence of residual variance, however, the number of items needs to belarge (80 items) to avoid an inflated Type I error and to reach a power level of.90 for a moderate effect.
机译:线性逻辑检验模型(LLTM)已被广泛应用于调查项目协变量对项目难度的影响。 LLTM用随机项目残差扩展,以解决未通过项目协变量解释的项目差异。这种扩展的LLTM称为LLTM-R。在本文中,对这两种模型的统计推断方法进行了研究。通过蒙特卡洛研究比较了I型错误率和功率。根据模拟结果,建议基于总和得分,Wald z检验和信息准则,在配对样本t检验中建议使用似然比检验(LRT),在轮廓似然置信区间内建议使用LRT因为LRT的简单性。此外,可以得出结论,LLTM-R是更好的通用模型方法。当LLTM-R是真实模型时,基于LLTM的推论似乎在很大程度上以自由的方式产生了偏见;而在LLTM是真实模型时,基于LLTM-R的推论仅以非常微小和保守的方式得到了偏见。此外,在没有剩余方差的情况下,I项的错误率和能力是可接受的,但项数少(10项)且人数少(200人)时,除能力外。但是,在存在剩余方差的情况下,项目数必须为大号(80件)以避免I型错误膨胀并达到0.90的效果适中。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号