Advertisement

A Taxonomy of Item Response Models in Psychometrika

  • Seock-Ho KimEmail author
  • Minho Kwak
  • Meina Bian
  • Zachary Feldberg
  • Travis Henry
  • Juyeon Lee
  • Ibrahim Burak Olmez
  • Yawei Shen
  • Yanyan Tan
  • Victoria Tanaka
  • Jue Wang
  • Jiajun Xu
  • Allan S. Cohen
Conference paper
Part of the Springer Proceedings in Mathematics & Statistics book series (PROMS, volume 265)

Abstract

The main aim of this study is to report on the frequency of which different item response theory models are employed in Psychometrika articles. Articles relevant to item response theory modeling in Psychometrika for 82 years (1936–2017) are sorted based on the classification framework by Thissen and Steinberg (Item response theory: Parameter estimation techniques. Dekker, New York, 1986). A sorting of the item response theory models used by authors of 367 research and review articles in Volumes 1–82 of Psychometrika indicates that the usual unidimensional parametric item response theory models for dichotomous items were employed in 51% of the articles. The usual unidimensional parametric item response theory models for polytomous items were employed in 21% of the articles. The multidimensional item response theory models were employed in 11% of the articles. Familiarity with each of more complicated item response theory models may gradually increase the percentage of accessible articles. Another classification based on recent articles is proposed and discussed. Guiding principles for the taxonomy are also discussed.

Keywords

Item response theory Models Psychometrika Rasch model Taxonomy 

References

  1. Baker, F. B., & Kim, S.-H. (2004). Item response theory: Parameter estimation techniques (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Dekker.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bock, R. D. (1997). A brief history of item response theory. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 16(4), 21–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. De Ayala, R. J. (2009). The theory and practice of item response theory. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  4. Hambleton, R. K., Swaminathan, H., & Roger, H. J. (1991). Fundamentals of item response theory. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  5. Kane, M. T. (2006). Validation. In R. L. Brennan (Ed.), Educational measurement (6th ed.). Westport, CT: Praeger.Google Scholar
  6. Nering, M. L., & Ostini, R. (2010). Handbook of polytomous item response theory models. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. Popham, W. J. (1993). Educational testing in America: Whats right, whats wrong? A criterion referenced perspective. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 12(1), 11–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Thissen, D., & Steinberg, L. (1986). A taxonomy of item response models. Psychometrika, 51, 567–577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Van der Linden, W. J. (Ed.). (2016a). Handbook of item response theory, Volume 1: Models. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.Google Scholar
  10. Van der Linden, W. J. (Ed.). (2016b). Handbook of item response theory, Volume 3: Applications. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Seock-Ho Kim
    • 1
    Email author
  • Minho Kwak
    • 1
  • Meina Bian
    • 1
  • Zachary Feldberg
    • 1
  • Travis Henry
    • 1
  • Juyeon Lee
    • 1
  • Ibrahim Burak Olmez
    • 1
  • Yawei Shen
    • 1
  • Yanyan Tan
    • 1
  • Victoria Tanaka
    • 1
  • Jue Wang
    • 1
  • Jiajun Xu
    • 1
  • Allan S. Cohen
    • 1
  1. 1.University of GeorgiaAthensUSA

Personalised recommendations