Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-zklqj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-31T12:04:14.107Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Information Matrices and Standard Errors for MLEs of Item Parameters in IRT

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2025

Ke-Hai Yuan ,
Ying Cheng  and
Jeff Patton
Ke-Hai Yuan*
Affiliation:
University of Notre Dame
Ying Cheng
Affiliation:
University of Notre Dame
Jeff Patton
Affiliation:
University of Notre Dame
*
Requests for reprints should be sent to Ke-Hai Yuan, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN 46556, USA. E-mail: kyuan@nd.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The paper clarifies the relationship among several information matrices for the maximum likelihood estimates (MLEs) of item parameters. It shows that the process of calculating the observed information matrix also generates a related matrix that is the middle piece of a sandwich-type covariance matrix. Monte Carlo results indicate that standard errors (SEs) based on the observed information matrix are robust to many, but not all, conditions of model/distribution misspecifications. SEs based on the sandwich-type covariance matrix perform most consistently across conditions. Results also suggest that SEs based on other matrices are either not consistent or perform not as robust as those based on the sandwich-type covariance matrix or the observed information matrix.

Keywords

model misspecificationMonte Carloobserved information matrixsandwich-type covariance matrixstandard errors

Information

Type
Original Paper
Information
Psychometrika , Volume 79 , Issue 2 , April 2014 , pp. 232 - 254
Copyright
Copyright © 2013 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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Baker, F.B., Kim, S.H. (2004). Item response theory: parameter estimation techniques, (2nd ed.). New York: DekkerCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bentler, P.M. (1995). EQS structural equations program manual, Encino: Multivariate SoftwareGoogle Scholar
Bock, R.D., Aitkin, M. (1981). Marginal maximum likelihood estimation of item parameters: application of an EM algorithm. Psychometrika, 46, 443–459CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bock, R.D., Lieberman, M. (1970). Fitting a response model for n dichotomously scored items. Psychometrika, 35, 179–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casella, G., Berger, R.L. (2001). Statistical inference, (2nd ed.). Pacific Grove: Duxbury PressGoogle Scholar
Dempster, A.P., Laird, N.M., Rubin, D.B. (1977). Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the EM algorithm (with discussion). Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B, 39, 1–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drasgow, F., Parsons, C.K. (1983). Application of unidimensional item response theory models to multidimensional data. Applied Psychological Measurement, 7, 189–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
du Toit, M. (2003). IRT from SSI: bilog-mg, multilog, parscale, testfact, Lincolnwood: Scientific Software InternationalGoogle Scholar
Efron, B., Hinkley, D.V. (1978). Assessing the accuracy of the maximum likelihood estimator: observed versus expected Fisher information. Biometrika, 65, 457–487CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Efron, B., Tibshirani, R.J. (1993). An introduction to the bootstrap, New York: Chapman & HallCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Embretson, S.E., Reise, S.P. (2000). Item response theory for psychologists, Mahwah: ErlbaumGoogle Scholar
Firth, D. (1993). Bias reduction of maximum likelihood estimates. Biometrika, 80, 27–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrison, D.A. (1986). Robustness of IRT parameter estimation to violations on the unidimensionality assumption. Journal of Educational Statistics, 11, 91–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayes, A.F., Cai, L. (2007). Using heteroscedasticity-consistent standard error estimators in OLS regression: an introduction and software implementation. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 709–722CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huber, P.J. (1967). The behavior of maximum likelihood estimates under nonstandard conditions. Proceedings of the fifth Berkeley symposium on mathematical statistics and probability, Berkeley: University of California Press 221233Google Scholar
Kirisci, L., Hsu, T.-C., Yu, L. (2001). Robustness of item parameter estimation programs to assumptions of unidimensionality and normality. Applied Psychological Measurement, 25, 146–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, Y.H. (2002). Analytically asymptotic standard errors of multidimensional IRT item parameters. In Shohov, S.P. (Eds.), Advances in psychology research, New York: Nova Science Publishers 87108Google Scholar
Li, Y.H., Lissitz, R.W. (2004). Applications of the analytically derived asymptotic standard errors of item response theory item parameter estimates. Journal of Educational Measurement, 41, 85–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liang, K.Y., Zeger, S.L. (1986). Longitudinal data analysis using generalized linear models. Biometrika, 73, 13–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lord, F.M., Novick, M.R. (1968). Statistical theories of mental test scores, Reading: Addison-WesleyGoogle Scholar
Louis, T.A. (1982). Finding the observed information matrix when using the EM algorithm. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B, 44, 226–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maronna, R.A., Martin, R.D., Yohai, V.J. (2006). Robust statistics: theory and methods, New York: WileyCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maydeu-Olivares, A., Cai, L., Hernandez, A. (2011). Comparing the fit of IRT and factor analysis models. Structural Equation Modeling, 18, 333–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mislevy, R.J. (1986). Bayes model estimation in item response models. Psychometrika, 51, 177–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mislevy, R.J., Bock, R.D. (1990). BILOG: maximum likelihood item analysis and test scoring with logistic models for binary items, Chicago: Scientific Software InternationalGoogle Scholar
Mislevy, R.J., Sheehan, K.M. (1989). Information matrices in latent-variable models. Journal of Educational Statistics, 14, 335–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muthén, L.K., Muthén, B.O. (2007). Mplus user’s guide, (5th ed.). Los Angeles: Muthén & MuthénGoogle Scholar
Ogasawara, H. (2010). Asymptotic expansions for the pivots using log-likelihood derivatives with an application in item response theory. Journal of Multivariate Analysis, 101, 2149–2167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reise, S.P., Yu, J. (1990). Parameter recovery in the graded response model using MULTILOG. Journal of Educational Measurement, 27, 133–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schuster, C., Yuan, K.-H. (2011). Robust estimation of latent ability in item response models. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 36, 720–735CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stout, W.F. (1987). A nonparametric approach for assessing latent trait dimensionality. Psychometrika, 52, 79–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stout, W.F., Habing, B., Douglas, J., Kim, H.R., Roussos, L.A., Zhang, J. (1996). Conditional covariance-based nonparametric multidimensionality assessment. Applied Psychological Measurement, 20, 331–354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thissen, D., Wainer, H. (1982). Some standard errors in item response theory. Psychometrika, 47, 397–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Toland, M.D. (2008). Determining the accuracy of item parameter standard error of estimates in BILOG-MG3. Doctoral dissertation. Retrieved from ProQuest LLC (UMI Number 3317288). Google Scholar
Tsutakawa, R.K. (1984). Estimation of two-parameter logistic item response curves. Journal of Educational Statistics, 9, 263–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wainer, H., Thissen, D. (1987). Estimating ability with the wrong model. Journal of Educational Statistics, 12, 339–368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, H. (1982). Maximum likelihood estimation of misspecified models. Econometrica, 50, 1–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woods, C.M., Lin, N. (2009). Item response theory with estimation of the latent density using Davidian curves. Applied Psychological Measurement, 33, 102–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woods, C.M., Thissen, D. (2006). Item response theory with estimation of the latent population distribution using spline-based densities. Psychometrika, 71, 281–301CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yuan, K.-H., Hayashi, K. (2006). Standard errors in covariance structure models: asymptotics versus bootstrap. British Journal of Mathematical & Statistical Psychology, 59, 397–417CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zhang, J., Stout, W.F. (1999). The theoretical DETECT index of dimensionality and its application to approximate simple structure. Psychometrika, 64, 213–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar