Some Results Based on a General Stochastic Model for Mental Tests | Psychometrika | Cambridge Core (original) (raw)

Extract

There have been a number of important developments by several authors which are based on the assumption that test taking behavior is stochastic. That is, it is assumed that the probability that an individual will “endorse” or “pass” a dichotomous item can be represented by some function of an underlying, “latent” attribute (possibly multivariate) called the item trace line or item characteristic curve. Various forms for trace lines have been postulated such as polynomial [9, 11], step function [9], normal ogive [13, 19], and logistic [1, 2]. An interesting model due to Rasch [18] utilizes only a subject parameter and item parameter to determine the probability of passing an item. The only model which does not make some formal assumptions about trace lines is Lazarsfeld's latent class model. All of these models for test behavior are unified by two basic assumptions. One is the stochastic assumption of a probability of passing or endorsing an item.

References

Birnbaum, A. Probability and statistics in item analysis and classification problems. Efficient design and use of tests of mental ability for various decision-making problems. Ser. Rep. No. 58-16, USAF Sch. Aviation Medicine, Randolph AFB, Texas, 1957.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Birnbaum, A. Probability and statistics in item analysis and classification problems. On the estimation of mental ability. Ser. Rep. No. 15, USAF Sch. Aviation Medicine, Randolph AFB, Texas, 1957.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cramér, H. Mathematical methods of statistics, Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press, 1946.Google Scholar

Green, B. F. A note on the calculation of weights for maximum battery reliability. Psychometrika, 1950, 15, 57–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Guttman, L. The basis for scalogram analysis. In Stouffer, S. A. et al. (Eds.), Measurement and prediction, Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press, 1950.Google Scholar

Horst, P. Matrix algebra for social scientists, New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1963.Google Scholar

Lazarsfeld, P. F. The logical and mathematical foundation of latent structure analysis. In Stouffer, S. A. et al. (Eds.), Measurement and prediction. Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press, 1950, 362–412.Google Scholar

Lazarsfeld, P. F. A conceptual introduction to latent structure analysis. In Lazarsfeld, P. F. (Eds.), Mathematical thinking in the social sciences. Glencoe, Ill.: Free Press, 1954, 349–387.Google Scholar

Lazarsfeld, P. F. Latent structure analysis and test theory. In Gulliksen, H. and Messick, S. (Eds.), Psychological scaling: theory and applications. New York: Wiley, 1960, 83–96.Google Scholar

Loevinger, J. A systematic approach to the construction and evaluation of tests of ability. Psychol. Monogr., 1947, 61, 285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lord, F. M. A theory of test scores. Psychometric Monogr., 1952, No. 7.Google Scholar

McDonald, R. P. A note on the derivation of the general latent class model. Psychometrika, 1962, 27, 203–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McDonald, R. P. A general approach to nonlinear factor analysis. Psychometrika, 1962, 27, 397–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Peel, E. A. A short method for calculating maximum battery reliability. Nature, 1947, 159, 816–816.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rao, C. R. Estimation and tests of significance in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 1955, 20, 93–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rasch, G. Studies in mathematical psychology. I. Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests, Copenhagen, Denmark: Danish Inst. Educ. Res., 1960.Google Scholar

Vinsonhaler, J. F. Stochastic models for repeated presentations of mental test items, Berkeley: Univ. California, 1965.Google Scholar