Author:
Burdick Don,Stenner A. Jackson,Kyngdon Andrew
Abstract
AbstractPsychometric models typically represent encounters between persons and dichotomous items as a random variable with two possible outcomes, one of which can be labeled success. For a given item, the stipulation that each person has a probability of success defines a construct on persons. This model specification defines the construct, but measurement is not yet achieved. The path to measurement must involve replication; unlike coin-tossing, this cannot be attained by repeating the encounter between the same person and the same item. Such replication can only be achieved with more items whose features are included in the model specifications. That is, the model must incorporate multiple items. This chapter examines multi-item model specifications that support the goal of measurement. The objective is to select the model that best facilitates the development of reliable measuring instruments. From this perspective, the Rasch model has important features compared to other models.
Publisher
Springer Nature Singapore
Reference14 articles.
1. Birnbaum, A. (1968). Some latent trait models and their use in inferring an examinee’s ability. In F. M. Lord & M. R. Novick (Eds.), Statistical theories of mental test scores (pp. 395–479). Addison-Wesley.
2. Borsboom, D., & Zand Scholten, A. (2008). The Rasch model and conjoint measurement theory from the perspective of psychometrics. Theory and Psychology, 18, 111–117.
3. Krantz, D. H., Luce, R. D, Suppes, P., & Tversky, A. (1971). Foundations of measurement, Vol. I: Additive and polynomial representations. New York: Academic Press.
4. Kyngdon, A. (2008a). The Rasch model from the perspective of the representational theory of measurement. Theory and Psychology, 18, 89–109.
5. Kyngdon, A. (2008b). Conjoint measurement, error and the Rasch model: A reply to Michell and Borsboom and Zand Scholten. Theory and Psychology, 18, 125–131.