Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-grxwn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-07T19:20:29.208Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Taxonomy of Item Response Models

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2025

David Thissen  and
Lynne Steinberg
David Thissen*
Affiliation:
University of Kansas
Lynne Steinberg
Affiliation:
Educational Testing Service
*
Requests for reprints should be sent to David Thissen, Department of Psychology, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS 66045.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A number of models for categorical item response data have been proposed in recent years. The models appear to be quite different. However, they may usefully be organized as members of only three distinct classes, within which the models are distinguished only by assumptions and constraints on their parameters. “Difference models” are appropriate for ordered responses, “divide-by-total” models may be used for either ordered or nominal responses, and “left-side added” models are used for multiple-choice responses with guessing. The details of the taxonomy and the models are described in this paper.

Keywords

item response theorytest theorylogistic models
Type
Original Paper
Information
Psychometrika , Volume 51 , Issue 4 , December 1986 , pp. 567 - 577
Copyright
Copyright © 1986 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.)

Footnotes

The present study was supported in part by two postdoctoral fellowships awarded to Lynne Steinberg: an Educational Testing Service Postdoctoral Fellowship at ETS, Princeton, NJ and an NIMH Individual National Research Service Award at Stanford University, Stanford, CA. Helpful comments by the editor and three anonymous reviewers are gratefully acknowledged.

References

Andersen, E. B. (1973). Conditional inference for multiple choice questionnaires. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 26, 42–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andrich, D. (1978). A rating formulation for ordered response categories. Psychometrika, 43, 561–573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andrich, D. (1982). An extension of the Rasch model for ratings providing both location and dispersion parameters. Psychometrika, 47, 105–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andrich, D. (1985). An elaboration of Guttman scaling with Rasch models for measurement. In Brandon-Tuma, N. (Eds.), Sociological methodology (pp. 33–80). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Birnbaum, A. (1968). Some latent trait models and their uses in inferring an examinee's ability. In Lord, F. M., Novick, M. R. (Eds.), Statistical theories of mental rest scores (pp. 397–479). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Bock, R. D. (1972). Estimating item parameters and latent ability when the responses are scored in two or more nominal categories. Psychometrika, 37, 29–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bock, R. D. (1975). Multivariate statistical methods in behavioral research, New York, NY: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
Bock, R. D., Aitkin, M. (1981). Marginal maximum likelihood estimation of item parameters: An application of anEM algorithm. Psychometrika, 46, 443–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bock, R. D., Lieberman, M. (1970). Fitting a response model forn dichotomously scored items. Psychometrika, 35, 179–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Choppin, B. (1983). A two-parameter latent trait model, Los Angeles, CA: University of California, Center for the Study of Evaluation, Graduate School of Education.Google Scholar
Guttman, L. (1950). The basis for scalogram analysis. In Stouffer, S. A., Guttman, L., Suchman, E. A., Lazarsfeld, P. F., Star, S. A., Clausen, J. A. (Eds.), Measurement and prediction, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Lawley, D. N. (1943). On problems connected with item selection and test construction. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 62-A, 74–82.Google Scholar
Lord, F. M. (1952). A theory of test scores. Psychometrika Monograph No. 7, 17 (4, Pt. 2).Google Scholar
Masters, G. N. (1982). A Rasch model for partial credit scoring. Psychometrika, 47, 149–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Masters, G. N. (1985). A comparison of latent-trait and latent-class analyses of Likert-type data. Psychometrika, 50, 69–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Masters, G. N., Wright, B. D. (1984). The essential process in a family of measurement models. Psychometrika, 49, 529–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rasch, G. (1960). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests, Copenhagen: Denmarks Paedagogiske Institut.Google Scholar
Rasch, G. (1961). On general laws and the meaning of measurement in psychology. Proceedings of the Fourth Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability (pp. 321–333). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Richardson, M. W. (1936). The relationship between difficulty and the differential validity of a test. Psychometrika, 1, 33–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roskam, E. E., Jansen, P. G. W. (1984). A new derivation of the Rasch model. In Defreef, E., Van Buggenhaut, J. (Eds.), Trends in mathematical psychology (pp. 293–307). Amsterdam: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samejima, F. (1969). Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores. Psychometrika Monograph No. 17, 34 (4, Pt. 2).Google Scholar
Suppes, P. (1977). Discussion: A critical comparison of models. In Spada, H., Kempf, W. F. (Eds.), Structural models of thinking and learning (pp. 21–24). Bern: Hans Huber.Google Scholar
Sympson, J. B. (1983, June). A new IRT model for calibrating multiple choice items. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Psychometric Society, Los Angeles, CA.Google Scholar
Thissen, D. (1982). Marginal maximum likelihood estimation for the one-parameter logistic model. Psychometrika, 47, 201–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thissen, D., Steinberg, L. (1984). A response model for multiple choice items. Psychometrika, 49, 501–519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tucker, L. R. (1946). Maximum validity of a test with equivalent items. Psychometrika, 11, 1–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Winsberg, S., Thissen, D. & Wainer, H. (1983, June). Estimation of the form of the item characteristic curve using monotone splines. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Psychometric Society, Los Angeles, CA.Google Scholar