调查非强迫性反应对个人水平得分的影响:努力调节型 IRT 模型能解决问题吗?

IF 1 4区 心理学 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, MATHEMATICAL
Applied Psychological Measurement Pub Date : 2021-09-01 Epub Date: 2021-06-11 DOI:10.1177/01466216211013896
Joseph A Rios, James Soland
{"title":"调查非强迫性反应对个人水平得分的影响:努力调节型 IRT 模型能解决问题吗?","authors":"Joseph A Rios, James Soland","doi":"10.1177/01466216211013896","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Suboptimal effort is a major threat to valid score-based inferences. While the effects of such behavior have been frequently examined in the context of mean group comparisons, minimal research has considered its effects on individual score use (e.g., identifying students for remediation). Focusing on the latter context, this study addressed two related questions via simulation and applied analyses. First, we investigated how much including noneffortful responses in scoring using a three-parameter logistic (3PL) model affects person parameter recovery and classification accuracy for noneffortful responders. Second, we explored whether improvements in these individual-level inferences were observed when employing the Effort Moderated IRT (EM-IRT) model under conditions in which its assumptions were met and violated. Results demonstrated that including 10% noneffortful responses in scoring led to average bias in ability estimates and misclassification rates by as much as 0.15 <i>SD</i>s and 7%, respectively. These results were mitigated when employing the EM-IRT model, particularly when model assumptions were met. However, once model assumptions were violated, the EM-IRT model's performance deteriorated, though still outperforming the 3PL model. Thus, findings from this study show that (a) including noneffortful responses when using individual scores can lead to potential unfounded inferences and potential score misuse, and (b) the negative impact that noneffortful responding has on person ability estimates and classification accuracy can be mitigated by employing the EM-IRT model, particularly when its assumptions are met.</p>","PeriodicalId":48300,"journal":{"name":"Applied Psychological Measurement","volume":"45 6","pages":"391-406"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8381694/pdf/10.1177_01466216211013896.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Investigating the Impact of Noneffortful Responses on Individual-Level Scores: Can the Effort-Moderated IRT Model Serve as a Solution?\",\"authors\":\"Joseph A Rios, James Soland\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/01466216211013896\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Suboptimal effort is a major threat to valid score-based inferences. While the effects of such behavior have been frequently examined in the context of mean group comparisons, minimal research has considered its effects on individual score use (e.g., identifying students for remediation). Focusing on the latter context, this study addressed two related questions via simulation and applied analyses. First, we investigated how much including noneffortful responses in scoring using a three-parameter logistic (3PL) model affects person parameter recovery and classification accuracy for noneffortful responders. Second, we explored whether improvements in these individual-level inferences were observed when employing the Effort Moderated IRT (EM-IRT) model under conditions in which its assumptions were met and violated. Results demonstrated that including 10% noneffortful responses in scoring led to average bias in ability estimates and misclassification rates by as much as 0.15 <i>SD</i>s and 7%, respectively. These results were mitigated when employing the EM-IRT model, particularly when model assumptions were met. However, once model assumptions were violated, the EM-IRT model's performance deteriorated, though still outperforming the 3PL model. Thus, findings from this study show that (a) including noneffortful responses when using individual scores can lead to potential unfounded inferences and potential score misuse, and (b) the negative impact that noneffortful responding has on person ability estimates and classification accuracy can be mitigated by employing the EM-IRT model, particularly when its assumptions are met.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48300,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Applied Psychological Measurement\",\"volume\":\"45 6\",\"pages\":\"391-406\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8381694/pdf/10.1177_01466216211013896.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Applied Psychological Measurement\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/01466216211013896\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/6/11 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MATHEMATICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Psychological Measurement","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01466216211013896","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/6/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MATHEMATICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

次优努力是对基于分数的有效推断的主要威胁。虽然这种行为的影响经常在平均团体比较的背景下进行研究,但很少有研究考虑其对个人分数使用的影响(例如,识别需要补习的学生)。针对后一种情况,本研究通过模拟和应用分析解决了两个相关问题。首先,我们研究了在使用三参数逻辑(3PL)模型进行评分时加入非强迫性反应对非强迫性反应者的人参数恢复和分类准确性有多大影响。其次,我们探讨了在符合和违反努力调节 IRT(EM-IRT)模型假设的条件下,采用该模型是否会改善这些个人层面的推断。结果表明,如果在评分中包含 10% 的非努力反应,则能力估计值和错误分类率的平均偏差分别高达 0.15 SDs 和 7%。在使用 EM-IRT 模型时,这些结果得到了缓解,尤其是在满足模型假设的情况下。然而,一旦违反模型假设,EM-IRT 模型的性能就会下降,尽管仍优于 3PL 模型。因此,本研究的结果表明:(a) 在使用个人分数时,将非痛苦反应包括在内可能会导致潜在的无根据推断和潜在的分数误用;(b) 非痛苦反应对个人能力估计和分类准确性的负面影响可以通过使用 EM-IRT 模型得到缓解,尤其是在满足其假设条件的情况下。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Investigating the Impact of Noneffortful Responses on Individual-Level Scores: Can the Effort-Moderated IRT Model Serve as a Solution?

Investigating the Impact of Noneffortful Responses on Individual-Level Scores: Can the Effort-Moderated IRT Model Serve as a Solution?

Suboptimal effort is a major threat to valid score-based inferences. While the effects of such behavior have been frequently examined in the context of mean group comparisons, minimal research has considered its effects on individual score use (e.g., identifying students for remediation). Focusing on the latter context, this study addressed two related questions via simulation and applied analyses. First, we investigated how much including noneffortful responses in scoring using a three-parameter logistic (3PL) model affects person parameter recovery and classification accuracy for noneffortful responders. Second, we explored whether improvements in these individual-level inferences were observed when employing the Effort Moderated IRT (EM-IRT) model under conditions in which its assumptions were met and violated. Results demonstrated that including 10% noneffortful responses in scoring led to average bias in ability estimates and misclassification rates by as much as 0.15 SDs and 7%, respectively. These results were mitigated when employing the EM-IRT model, particularly when model assumptions were met. However, once model assumptions were violated, the EM-IRT model's performance deteriorated, though still outperforming the 3PL model. Thus, findings from this study show that (a) including noneffortful responses when using individual scores can lead to potential unfounded inferences and potential score misuse, and (b) the negative impact that noneffortful responding has on person ability estimates and classification accuracy can be mitigated by employing the EM-IRT model, particularly when its assumptions are met.

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
2.30
自引率
8.30%
发文量
50
期刊介绍: Applied Psychological Measurement publishes empirical research on the application of techniques of psychological measurement to substantive problems in all areas of psychology and related disciplines.
×
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