Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-hvd4g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-08T04:24:59.903Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Graded response model based on the logistic positive exponent family of models for dichotomous responses

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2025

Fumiko Samejima
Fumiko Samejima*
Affiliation:
University of Tennessee
*
Requests for reprints should be sent to Fumiko Samejima, Department of Psychology, 108 Conference Center Bldg., University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996-4100, USA. E-mail: fsamejim@utk.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Samejima (Psychometrika 65:319–335, 2000) proposed the logistic positive exponent family of models (LPEF) for dichotomous responses in the unidimensional latent space. The objective of the present paper is to propose and discuss a graded response model that is expanded from the LPEF, in the context of item response theory (IRT). This specific graded response model belongs to the general framework of graded response model (Samejima, Psychometrika Monograph, No. 17, 1969 and No. 18, 1972; Handbook of modern item response theory, Springer, New York, 1997; Encyclopedia of Social Measurement, Academic Press, San Diego, 2004), and, in particular to the heterogeneous case (Samejima, Psychometrika Monograph, No. 18, 1972). Thus, the model can deal with any number of ordered polytomous responses, such as letter grades (e.g., A, B, C, D, F), etc.

For brevity, hereafter, the model will be called the LPEF graded response model, or LPEFG. This model reflects the opposing two principles contained in the LPEF for dichotomous responses, with the logistic model (Birnbaum, Statistical theories of mental test scores, Addison Wesley, Reading, 1968) as their transition, which provide a reasonable rationale for partial credits in LPEFG, among others.

Keywords

item response theorygraded response modellogistic positive exponent family of models
Type
Theory and Methods
Information
Psychometrika , Volume 73 , Issue 4 , December 2008 , pp. 561 - 578
Copyright
Copyright © 2008 The Psychometric Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Birnbaum, A. (1968). Some latent trait models and their use in inferring an examinee’s ability, Contributed chapters. In Lord, F.M., & Novick, M.R. (Eds.), Statistical theories of mental test scores (Chaps. 17–20), Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.Google Scholar
Bock, R.D. (1972). Estimating item parameters and latent ability when responses are scored in two or more nominal categories. Psychometrika, 37, 29–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Indow, T., & Samejima, F. (1962). LIS measurement scale of non-verbal reasoning ability (in Japanese), Tokyo, Japan: Nippon Bunka Kagakusha.Google Scholar
Levine, M.V. (1984). An introduction to multilinear formula score theory (Office of Naval Research Report 84-4, N00014-83-K-0397). Champaign, IL: Model-Based Measurement Laboratory, University of Illinois.Google Scholar
Lord, F.M., & Novick, M.R. (1968). Statistical theories of mental test scores, Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.Google Scholar
Ramsay, J.O. (1991). Kernel smoothing approaches to nonparametric item characteristic estimation. Psychometrika, 56, 611–630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samejima, F. (1969). Estimation of ability using a response pattern of graded scores. Psychometrika Monograph, No. 17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samejima, F. (1972). A general model for free-response data. Psychometrika Monograph, No. 18.Google Scholar
Samejima, F. (1973). Homogeneous case of the continuous response model. Psychometrika, 38, 203–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samejima, F. (1973). A comment on Birnbaum’s three-parameter logistic model in the latent trait theory. Psychometrika, 38, 221–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samejima, F. (1983). A latent trait model for differential strategies in cognitive processes (Office of Naval Research Report 83-1, N00014-81-C-0569). Knoxville, TN: University of Tennessee.Google Scholar
Samejima, F. (1993). An approximation for the bias function of the maximum likelihood estimate of a latent variable for the general case where the item, responses are discrete. Psychometrika, 58, 119–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samejima, F. (1995a). An easy method to switch to the acceleration model from other models for graded responses. Paper presented at the 1995 annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education on April 21, 1995.Google Scholar
Samejima, F. (1995). Acceleration model in the heterogeneous case of the general graded response model. Psychometrika, 60, 549–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samejima, F. (1996). Evaluation of mathematical models for ordered polychotomous responses. Behaviormetrika, 23, 17–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samejima, F. (1997). Graded response model. In Van der Linden, W.J., Hambleton, R.K. (Eds.), Handbook of modern item response theory (Chap. 5), New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Samejima, F. (1998). Efficient nonparametric approaches for estimating the operating characteristics of discrete item responses. Psychometrika, 63, 111–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samejima, F. (2000). Logistic positive exponent family of models: Virtue of asymmetric item characteristic curves. Psychometrika, 65, 319–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samejima, F. (2001). Nonparametric on-line item calibration (Law School Admission Council Final Report). Knoxville, TN: Mathematical Psychology Laboratory, University of Tennessee.Google Scholar
Samejima, F. (2004). Graded response model. Encyclopedia of social measurement (pp. 140–153). San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar