以统一的视角看待评估模式,第一部分:框架的基础

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS
Stefano Noventa , Jürgen Heller , Augustin Kelava
{"title":"以统一的视角看待评估模式,第一部分:框架的基础","authors":"Stefano Noventa ,&nbsp;Jürgen Heller ,&nbsp;Augustin Kelava","doi":"10.1016/j.jmp.2024.102872","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>In the past years, several theories for assessment have been developed within the overlapping fields of Psychometrics and Mathematical Psychology. The most notable are Item Response Theory (IRT), Cognitive Diagnostic Assessment (CDA), and Knowledge Structure Theory (KST). In spite of their common goals, these frameworks have been developed largely independently, focusing on slightly different aspects. Yet various connections between them can be found in literature. In this contribution, Part I of a three-part work, a unified perspective is suggested that uses two primitives (structure and process) and two operations (factorization and reparametrization) to derive IRT, CDA, and KST models. A Taxonomy of models is built using a two-processes sequential approach that captures the similarities between the conditional probabilities featured in these models and separates them into a first process modeling the effects of individual ability on item mastering, and a second process representing the effects of pure chance on item solving.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022249624000415/pdfft?md5=28cc2070f8dcf7f69ed90762b1200a1a&pid=1-s2.0-S0022249624000415-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Toward a unified perspective on assessment models, part I: Foundations of a framework\",\"authors\":\"Stefano Noventa ,&nbsp;Jürgen Heller ,&nbsp;Augustin Kelava\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jmp.2024.102872\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>In the past years, several theories for assessment have been developed within the overlapping fields of Psychometrics and Mathematical Psychology. The most notable are Item Response Theory (IRT), Cognitive Diagnostic Assessment (CDA), and Knowledge Structure Theory (KST). In spite of their common goals, these frameworks have been developed largely independently, focusing on slightly different aspects. Yet various connections between them can be found in literature. In this contribution, Part I of a three-part work, a unified perspective is suggested that uses two primitives (structure and process) and two operations (factorization and reparametrization) to derive IRT, CDA, and KST models. A Taxonomy of models is built using a two-processes sequential approach that captures the similarities between the conditional probabilities featured in these models and separates them into a first process modeling the effects of individual ability on item mastering, and a second process representing the effects of pure chance on item solving.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":2,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022249624000415/pdfft?md5=28cc2070f8dcf7f69ed90762b1200a1a&pid=1-s2.0-S0022249624000415-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022249624000415\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022249624000415","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在过去的几年中,心理测量学和数理心理学这两个相互重叠的领域发展出了多种评估理论。其中最著名的有项目反应理论(IRT)、认知诊断评估(CDA)和知识结构理论(KST)。尽管目标相同,但这些框架在很大程度上是独立发展起来的,侧重点略有不同。然而,在文献中可以发现它们之间的各种联系。本文是三部曲的第一部分,提出了一个统一的视角,使用两个基元(结构和过程)和两种操作(因式分解和重参数化)来推导 IRT、CDA 和 KST 模型。本文采用双过程顺序法建立了模型分类学,该方法抓住了这些模型中条件概率之间的相似性,并将它们分离为第一过程和第二过程,前者模拟个人能力对项目掌握的影响,后者代表纯偶然性对项目解题的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Toward a unified perspective on assessment models, part I: Foundations of a framework

In the past years, several theories for assessment have been developed within the overlapping fields of Psychometrics and Mathematical Psychology. The most notable are Item Response Theory (IRT), Cognitive Diagnostic Assessment (CDA), and Knowledge Structure Theory (KST). In spite of their common goals, these frameworks have been developed largely independently, focusing on slightly different aspects. Yet various connections between them can be found in literature. In this contribution, Part I of a three-part work, a unified perspective is suggested that uses two primitives (structure and process) and two operations (factorization and reparametrization) to derive IRT, CDA, and KST models. A Taxonomy of models is built using a two-processes sequential approach that captures the similarities between the conditional probabilities featured in these models and separates them into a first process modeling the effects of individual ability on item mastering, and a second process representing the effects of pure chance on item solving.

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
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
×
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