结合正则化和逻辑回归模型,验证认知诊断模型的 Q 矩阵。

IF 1.5 3区 心理学 Q3 MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS
Xiaojian Sun, Tongxin Zhang, Chang Nie, Naiqing Song, Tao Xin
{"title":"结合正则化和逻辑回归模型,验证认知诊断模型的 Q 矩阵。","authors":"Xiaojian Sun,&nbsp;Tongxin Zhang,&nbsp;Chang Nie,&nbsp;Naiqing Song,&nbsp;Tao Xin","doi":"10.1111/bmsp.12346","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Q-matrix is an important component of most cognitive diagnosis models (CDMs); however, it mainly relies on subject matter experts' judgements in empirical studies, which introduces the possibility of misspecified q-entries. To address this, statistical Q-matrix validation methods have been proposed to aid experts' judgement. A few of these methods, including the multiple logistic regression-based (MLR-B) method and the Hull method, can be applied to general CDMs, but they are either time-consuming or lack accuracy under certain conditions. In this study, we combine the <i>L</i><sub>1</sub> regularization and MLR model to validate the Q-matrix. Specifically, an <i>L</i><sub>1</sub> penalty term is imposed on the log-likelihood of the MLR model to select the necessary attributes for each item. A simulation study with various factors was conducted to examine the performance of the new method against the two existing methods. The results show that the regularized MLR-B method (a) produces the highest Q-matrix recovery rate (QRR) and true positive rate (TPR) for most conditions, especially with a small sample size; (b) yields a slightly higher true negative rate (TNR) than either the MLR-B or the Hull method for most conditions; and (c) requires less computation time than the MLR-B method and similar computation time as the Hull method. A real data set is analysed for illustration purposes.</p>","PeriodicalId":55322,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Mathematical & Statistical Psychology","volume":"78 1","pages":"1-21"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Combining regularization and logistic regression model to validate the Q-matrix for cognitive diagnosis model\",\"authors\":\"Xiaojian Sun,&nbsp;Tongxin Zhang,&nbsp;Chang Nie,&nbsp;Naiqing Song,&nbsp;Tao Xin\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/bmsp.12346\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Q-matrix is an important component of most cognitive diagnosis models (CDMs); however, it mainly relies on subject matter experts' judgements in empirical studies, which introduces the possibility of misspecified q-entries. To address this, statistical Q-matrix validation methods have been proposed to aid experts' judgement. A few of these methods, including the multiple logistic regression-based (MLR-B) method and the Hull method, can be applied to general CDMs, but they are either time-consuming or lack accuracy under certain conditions. In this study, we combine the <i>L</i><sub>1</sub> regularization and MLR model to validate the Q-matrix. Specifically, an <i>L</i><sub>1</sub> penalty term is imposed on the log-likelihood of the MLR model to select the necessary attributes for each item. A simulation study with various factors was conducted to examine the performance of the new method against the two existing methods. The results show that the regularized MLR-B method (a) produces the highest Q-matrix recovery rate (QRR) and true positive rate (TPR) for most conditions, especially with a small sample size; (b) yields a slightly higher true negative rate (TNR) than either the MLR-B or the Hull method for most conditions; and (c) requires less computation time than the MLR-B method and similar computation time as the Hull method. A real data set is analysed for illustration purposes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55322,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British Journal of Mathematical & Statistical Psychology\",\"volume\":\"78 1\",\"pages\":\"1-21\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British Journal of Mathematical & Statistical Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bmsp.12346\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Mathematical & Statistical Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bmsp.12346","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

Q 矩阵是大多数认知诊断模型(CDMs)的重要组成部分;然而,在实证研究中,它主要依赖于主题专家的判断,这就带来了 Q 条目被错误规范的可能性。为了解决这个问题,人们提出了统计 Q 矩阵验证方法来帮助专家做出判断。其中一些方法,包括基于多元逻辑回归(MLR-B)的方法和 Hull 方法,可以应用于一般的 CDM,但它们要么耗时长,要么在某些条件下缺乏准确性。在本研究中,我们结合了 L1 正则化和 MLR 模型来验证 Q 矩阵。具体来说,我们在 MLR 模型的对数概率上施加了 L1 惩罚项,以便为每个项目选择必要的属性。通过对各种因素进行模拟研究,考察了新方法与现有两种方法的性能对比。结果表明,正则化 MLR-B 方法(a) 在大多数情况下,尤其是样本量较小的情况下,Q 矩阵恢复率 (QRR) 和真阳性率 (TPR) 最高;(b) 在大多数情况下,真阴性率 (TNR) 略高于 MLR-B 或 Hull 方法;(c) 所需的计算时间少于 MLR-B 方法,与 Hull 方法相近。为说明起见,对一组真实数据进行了分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Combining regularization and logistic regression model to validate the Q-matrix for cognitive diagnosis model

Q-matrix is an important component of most cognitive diagnosis models (CDMs); however, it mainly relies on subject matter experts' judgements in empirical studies, which introduces the possibility of misspecified q-entries. To address this, statistical Q-matrix validation methods have been proposed to aid experts' judgement. A few of these methods, including the multiple logistic regression-based (MLR-B) method and the Hull method, can be applied to general CDMs, but they are either time-consuming or lack accuracy under certain conditions. In this study, we combine the L1 regularization and MLR model to validate the Q-matrix. Specifically, an L1 penalty term is imposed on the log-likelihood of the MLR model to select the necessary attributes for each item. A simulation study with various factors was conducted to examine the performance of the new method against the two existing methods. The results show that the regularized MLR-B method (a) produces the highest Q-matrix recovery rate (QRR) and true positive rate (TPR) for most conditions, especially with a small sample size; (b) yields a slightly higher true negative rate (TNR) than either the MLR-B or the Hull method for most conditions; and (c) requires less computation time than the MLR-B method and similar computation time as the Hull method. A real data set is analysed for illustration purposes.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
3.80%
发文量
34
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology publishes articles relating to areas of psychology which have a greater mathematical or statistical aspect of their argument than is usually acceptable to other journals including: • mathematical psychology • statistics • psychometrics • decision making • psychophysics • classification • relevant areas of mathematics, computing and computer software These include articles that address substantitive psychological issues or that develop and extend techniques useful to psychologists. New models for psychological processes, new approaches to existing data, critiques of existing models and improved algorithms for estimating the parameters of a model are examples of articles which may be favoured.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信