Abstract
Reading fluency identifies the ability for children to articulately evidence comprehension of passages presented and this type of task inherently has components related to ability and response latency. Children with higher rates of fluency will theoretically have higher abilities and lower response latencies. Traditional methods for analyzing performance have focused on ability to correctly respond, ignoring response latency information. Theoretical models for response latency have introduced frameworks relating item difficulty and response time, ignoring responses correctness. More recent work by van der Linden (2007) proposed a joint response and response latency framework, with simultaneous estimation of ability and speed parameters. We provide an overview of traditional ability modeling schemes and evidence in favor of including response latency in the estimation of ability. An applied example of reading fluency illustrates the combined response and response latency model and how to interpret these findings in relation to traditional response only models. Our findings show more accurate parameter estimates are obtained when response latency is modeled versus response only models. Researchers and educators are encouraged to gather data efficiently and embrace modern modeling methods to more closely model theoretical frameworks.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
The 30 sentences administered to students in this example were from an alternate form than that given to a different set of 212 students in the sample from the Petscher et al. (2014) study.
References
Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238–246.
Bentler, P. M., & Bonnet, D. C. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588–606.
Blackwell, C. K., Lauricella, A. R., Wartella, E., Robb, M., & Schomburg, R. (2013). Adoption and use of technology in early education: the interplay of extrinsic barriers and teacher attitudes. Computers & Education, 69, 310–319. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2013.07.024.
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological Methods and Research, 21, 230–258.
Casella, G., & Berger, R. L. (2002). Statistical inference (Vol. 2). Pacific Grove, CA: Duxbury.
Cattell, R. B. (1948). Concepts and methods in the measurement of group syntality. Psychological Review, 55, 48–63. doi:10.1037/h0055921.
Chard, D. J., Vaughn, S., & Tyler, B. (2002). A synthesis of research on effective interventions for building reading fluency with elementary students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35(5), 386–406. http://search.proquest.com/docview/619935634?accountid=4840.
Christ, T. J., & Silberglitt, B. (2007). Estimates of the standard error of measurement for curriculum-based measures of oral reading fluency. School Psychology Review, 36, 130–146.
Cummings, K. D., Atkins, T., Allison, R., & Cole, C. (2008). Response to Intervention. Teaching Exceptional Children, 40, 24–31.
Cummings, K. D., Park, Y., & Schaper, H. A. B. (2012). Form effects on DIBELS Next oral reading fluency progress-monitoring passages. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 38, 91–104.
Cunningham, A. E., & Stanovich, K. E. (1997). Early reading acquisition and its relation to reading experience and ability 10 years later. Developmental Psychology, 33(6), 934–945.
de Ayala, R. J. (2009). The theory and practice of item response theory. New York: Guilford.
Deno, S. L. (2003). Developments in curriculum-based measurement. The Journal of Special Education, 37(3), 184–192.
Divgi, D. R. (1980). Dimensionality of binary items: Use of a mixed model. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education. Boston.
Dunn, T. J., Baguley, T., & Brunsden, V. (2014). From alpha to omega: A practical solution to the pervasive problem of internal consistency estimation. British Journal of Psychology, 105 (3), 399–412.
Educational Testing Service. (2007). Test and score data summary for TOEFL internet-based test. Princeton: Author.
Embretson, S. E., & Reise, S. (2000). Item response theory for psychologists. Mahwah: Erlbaum.
Ferrando, P., & Lorenzo-Seva, U. (2007). An item response theory model for incorporating response time data in binary personality items. Applied Psychological Measurement, 31, 525–543. doi:10.1177/0146621606295197.
Foorman, B. R., Petscher, Y., & Bishop, M. D. (2012). The incremental variance of morphological knowledge to reading comprehension in grades 3–10 beyond prior reading comprehension, spelling, and text reading efficiency. Learning and Individual Differences, 22, 792–798. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2012.07.009.
Fox, J. P., Klein Entink, R. H. K., & van der Linden, W. J. (2007). Modeling of responses and response time with the package CIRT. Journal of Statistical Software, 20, 1–14.
Francis, D. J., Santi, K. S., Barr, C., Fletcher, J. M., Varisco, A., & Foorman, B. R. (2008). Form effects on the estimation of students' oral reading fluency using DIBELS. Journal of School Psychology, 46, 315–342. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2007.06.003.
Fuchs, L. S., Deno, S. L., & Mirkin, P. K. (1984). The effects of frequent curriculum-based measurement and evaluation on pedagogy, student achievement, and student awareness of learning. American Educational Research Journal, 21(2), 449–460.
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hosp, M. K., & Jenkins, J. R. (2001). Oral reading fluency as an indicator of reading competence: a theoretical, empirical, and historical analysis. Scientific Studies of Reading, 5, 239–256. doi:10.1207/S1532799XSSR0503_3.
Goodglass, H., Theurkauf, J. C., & Wingfield, A. (1984). Naming latencies as evidence for two modes for lexical retrieval. Applied Psycholinguistics, 5, 135–14.
Gray, L., Thomas, N., & Lewis, L. (2010). Teachers’ use of educational technology in U.S. public schools: 2009 (NCES 2010-040). Retrieved from the U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Educational Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences. http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2010/2010040.pdf.
Jang, E. E., & Roussos, L. (2007). An investigation into the dimensionality of TOEFL using conditional covariance-based nonparametric approach. Journal of Educational Measurement, 44, 1–21.
Kamil, M. L. (2004). Vocabulary and comprehension instruction: Summary and implications of the national reading panel findings. In P. McCardle & V. Chhabra (Eds.), The voice of evidence in reading research (pp. 213–234). Baltimore: Paul H Brookes.
Klein Entink, R. H., Kuhn, J.-T., Hornke, L. F., and Fox, J.-P. (2009). Evaluating cognitive theory: A joint modeling approach using responses and response times. Psychological Methods, 14, 54–75. doi:10.1037/a0014877.
Lord, F. M. (1980). Applications of item response theory to practical testing problems. New York: Erlbaum Associates.
McDonald, R. P. (1999). Test theory: A unified treatment. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Mercer, S. H., Dufrene, B. A., Zoder-Martell, K., Harpole, L. L., Mitchell, R. R., & Blaze, J. T. (2012). Generalizability theory analysis of CBM maze reliability in third- through fifth- grade students. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 37, 183–190. doi:10.1177/1534508411430319.
Miranda, H., & Russell, M. (2011). Predictors of teacher-directed student use of technology in elementary classrooms: A multilevel SEM approach using data from the USEIT study. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 43, 301–323.
Muthen, L. K., & Muthen, B. O. (1998–2012). Mplus. Seventh Edition. Los Angeles: Muthen & Muthen.
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: an evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction (NIH Publication No. 00–4769).
Orlando, M., & Thissen, D. (2000). Likelihood-based item-fit indices for dichotomous item response theory models. Applied Psychological Measurement, 24(1), 50–64.
Perfetti, C. A., & Hogaboam, T. (1975). Relationship between single word decoding and reading comprehension skill. Journal of Educational Psychology, 67, 461–469.
Petscher, Y., & Kim, Y. S. (2011). The utility and accuracy of oral reading fluency score types in predicting reading comprehension. Journal of School Psychology, 49, 107–129. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2010.09.004.
Petscher, Y., Mitchell, A. M., & Foorman, B. R. (2015). Improving the reliability of student scores from speeded assessments: an illustration of conditional item response theory using a computer-administered measure of vocabulary. Reading and Writing, 1–26.
Poncy, B. C., Skinner, C. H., & Axtell, P. K. (2005). An investigation of the reliability and standard error of measurement of words read correctly per minute using curriculum-based measurement. Journal of Psychoeductional Assessment, 23, 326–338. doi:10.1177/073428290502300403.
Pressey, B. (2013). Comparative analysis of national teacher surveys. http://www.joanganzcooneycenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/jgcc_teacher_survey_analysis_final.pdf/.
Prindle, J. J. (2012). A functional use of response time data in cognitive assessment. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from USC Digital Library.
R Core Team. (2014). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/.
SAS Institute Inc. (2011). Base SAS® 9.3 Procedures Guide. Cary: SAS Institute.
Scarborough, H. S. (2001). Connecting early language and literacy to later reading (dis)abilities: Evidence, theory, and practice. In S. Neumann & D. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook for research in early literacy (pp. 97–110). New York: Guilford.
Scheiblechner, H. (1985). Psychometric models for speed-test construction: The linear exponential model. In S. E. Embreston (Ed.), Test design developments in psychology and psychometrics (pp. 219–244). New York: Academic Press.
Schnipke, D. L., & Scrams, D. J. (2002). Exploring issues of examinee behavior: insights gained from response-time analyses. In C. N. Mills, M. T. Potenza, J. J. Fremer, & W. C. Ward (Eds.), Computer-based testing: building the foundation for future assessments. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Sireci, S. G., Thissen, D., & Wainer, H. (1991). On the reliability of testlet-based tests. Journal of Educational Measurement, 28, 237–247. doi:10.1111/j.1745–3984.1991.tb00356.x.
Sternberg, S. (1969). Memory-scanning: Mental processes revealed by reaction-time experiments. American Scientist, 57(4), 421–457.
Stout, W. F. (1987). A nonparametric approach for assessing latent trait dimensionality. Psychometrika, 52, 589–617.
Tate, R. (2003). A comparison of selected empirical methods for assessing the structure of responses to test items. Applied Psychological Measurement, 27, 159–203.
van der Linden, W. J. (2007). A hierarchical framework for modeling speed and accuracy on test items. Psychometrika, 72, 287–308. doi:10.1007/s11336-006-1478-z.
van der Linden, W. J. (2011). Modeling response times with latent variables: principles and applications. Psychological Test and Assessment Modeling, 53, 334–358.
van der Linden, W. J., & van Krimpen-Stoop, E. M. L. A. (2003). Using response times to detect responses in computerized adaptive testing. Psychometrika, 68, 251–265.
Wainer, H., Bradlow, E. T., & Wang, X. (2007). Testlet response theory and its applications. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Zeno, S. M., Ivens, S. H., Millard, R. T., & Duvvuri, R. (1995). The educator’s word frequency guide. New York: Touchstone Applied Science Associates, Inc.
Zhang, J., & Stout, W. (1999). The theoretical detect index of dimensionality and its application to approximate simple structure. Psychometrika, 64, 213–249.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Prindle, J., Mitchell, A., Petscher, Y. (2016). Using Response Time and Accuracy Data to Inform the Measurement of Fluency. In: Cummings, K., Petscher, Y. (eds) The Fluency Construct. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2803-3_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2803-3_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4939-2802-6
Online ISBN: 978-1-4939-2803-3
eBook Packages: Behavioral Science and PsychologyBehavioral Science and Psychology (R0)