The paper proposes a composite likelihood estimation approach that uses bivariate instead of multivariate marginal probabilities for ordinal longitudinal responses using a latent variable model. The model considers time-dependent latent variables and item-specific random effects to be accountable for the interdependencies of the multivariate ordinal items. Time-dependent latent variables are linked with an autoregressive model. Simulation results have shown composite likelihood estimators to have a small amount of bias and mean square error and as such they are feasible alternatives to full maximum likelihood. Model selection criteria developed for composite likelihood estimation are used in the applications. Furthermore, lower-order residuals are used as measures-of-fit for the selected models.

Bi-factor analysis is a form of confirmatory factor analysis originally introduced by Holzinger and Swineford (Psychometrika 47:41–54, 1937). The bi-factor model has a general factor, a number of group factors, and an explicit bi-factor structure. Jennrich and Bentler (Psychometrika 76:537–549, 2011) introduced an exploratory form of bi-factor analysis that does not require one to provide an explicit bi-factor structure a priori. They use exploratory factor analysis and a bifactor rotation criterion designed to produce a rotated loading matrix that has an approximate bi-factor structure. Among other things this can be used as an aid in finding an explicit bi-factor structure for use in a confirmatory bi-factor analysis. They considered only orthogonal rotation. The purpose of this paper is to consider oblique rotation and to compare it to orthogonal rotation. Because there are many more oblique rotations of an initial loading matrix than orthogonal rotations, one expects the oblique results to approximate a bi-factor structure better than orthogonal rotations and this is indeed the case. A surprising result arises when oblique bi-factor rotation methods are applied to ideal data.

The Graded Response Model (GRM; Samejima, Estimation of ability using a response pattern of graded scores, Psychometric Monograph No. 17, Richmond, VA: The Psychometric Society, 1969) can be derived by assuming a linear regression of a continuous variable, Z, on the trait, θ, to underlie the ordinal item scores (Takane & de Leeuw in Psychometrika, 52:393–408, 1987). Traditionally, a normal distribution is specified for Z implying homoscedastic error variances and a normally distributed θ. In this paper, we present the Heteroscedastic GRM with Skewed Latent Trait, which extends the traditional GRM by incorporation of heteroscedastic error variances and a skew-normal latent trait. An appealing property of the extended GRM is that it includes the traditional GRM as a special case. This enables specific tests on the normality assumption of Z. We show how violations of normality in Z can lead to asymmetrical category response functions. The ability to test this normality assumption is beneficial from both a statistical and substantive perspective. In a simulation study, we show the viability of the model and investigate the specificity of the effects. We apply the model to a dataset on affect and a dataset on alexithymia.

In practice, the sum of the item scores is often used as a basis for comparing subjects. For items that have more than two ordered score categories, only the partial credit model (PCM) and special cases of this model imply that the subjects are stochastically ordered on the common latent variable. However, the PCM is very restrictive with respect to the constraints that it imposes on the data. In this paper, sufficient conditions for the stochastic ordering of subjects by their sum score are obtained. These conditions define the isotonic (nonparametric) PCM model. The isotonic PCM is more flexible than the PCM, which makes it useful for a wider variety of tests. Also, observable properties of the isotonic PCM are derived in the form of inequality constraints. It is shown how to obtain estimates of the score distribution under these constraints by using the Gibbs sampling algorithm. A small simulation study shows that the Bayesian p-values based on the log-likelihood ratio statistic can be used to assess the fit of the isotonic PCM to the data, where model-data fit can be taken as a justification of the use of the sum score to order subjects.

Multidimensional computer adaptive testing (MCAT) can provide higher precision and reliability or reduce test length when compared with unidimensional CAT or with the paper-and-pencil test. This study compared five item selection procedures in the MCAT framework for both domain scores and overall scores through simulation by varying the structure of item pools, the population distribution of the simulees, the number of items selected, and the content area. The existing procedures such as Volume (Segall in Psychometrika, 61:331–354, 1996), Kullback–Leibler information (Veldkamp & van der Linden in Psychometrika 67:575–588, 2002), Minimize the error variance of the linear combination (van der Linden in J. Educ. Behav. Stat. 24:398–412, 1999), and Minimum Angle (Reckase in Multidimensional item response theory, Springer, New York, 2009) are compared to a new procedure, Minimize the error variance of the composite score with the optimized weight, proposed for the first time in this study. The intent is to find an item selection procedure that yields higher precisions for both the domain and composite abilities and a higher percentage of selected items from the item pool. The comparison is performed by examining the absolute bias, correlation, test reliability, time used, and item usage. Three sets of item pools are used with the item parameters estimated from real live CAT data. Results show that Volume and Minimum Angle performed similarly, balancing information for all content areas, while the other three procedures performed similarly, with a high precision for both domain and overall scores when selecting items with the required number of items for each domain. The new item selection procedure has the highest percentage of item usage. Moreover, for the overall score, it produces similar or even better results compared to those from the method that selects items favoring the general dimension using the general model (Segall in Psychometrika 66:79–97, 2001); the general dimension method has low precision for the domain scores. In addition to the simulation study, the mathematical theories for certain procedures are derived. The theories are confirmed by the simulation applications.

We propose a functional version of extended redundancy analysis that examines directional relationships among several sets of multivariate variables. As in extended redundancy analysis, the proposed method posits that a weighed composite of each set of exogenous variables influences a set of endogenous variables. It further considers endogenous and/or exogenous variables functional, varying over time, space, or other continua. Computationally, the method reduces to minimizing a penalized least-squares criterion through the adoption of a basis function expansion approach to approximating functions. We develop an alternating regularized least-squares algorithm to minimize this criterion. We apply the proposed method to real datasets to illustrate the empirical feasibility of the proposed method.

Social scientists are frequently interested in assessing the qualities of social settings such as classrooms, schools, neighborhoods, or day care centers. The most common procedure requires observers to rate social interactions within these settings on multiple items and then to combine the item responses to obtain a summary measure of setting quality. A key aspect of the quality of such a summary measure is its reliability. In this paper we derive a confidence interval for reliability, a test for the hypothesis that the reliability meets a minimum standard, and the power of this test against alternative hypotheses. Next, we consider the problem of using data from a preliminary field study of the measurement procedure to inform the design of a later study that will test substantive hypotheses about the correlates of setting quality. The preliminary study is typically called the “generalizability study” or “G study” while the later, substantive study is called the “decision study” or “D study.” We show how to use data from the G study to estimate reliability, a confidence interval for the reliability, and the power of tests for the reliability of measurement produced under alternative designs for the D study. We conclude with a discussion of sample size requirements for G studies.

The study of prediction bias is important and the last five decades include research studies that examined whether test scores differentially predict academic or employment performance. Previous studies used ordinary least squares (OLS) to assess whether groups differ in intercepts and slopes. This study shows that OLS yields inaccurate inferences for prediction bias hypotheses. This paper builds upon the criterion-predictor factor model by demonstrating the effect of selection, measurement error, and measurement bias on prediction bias studies that use OLS. The range restricted, criterion-predictor factor model is used to compute Type I error and power rates associated with using regression to assess prediction bias hypotheses. In short, OLS is not capable of testing hypotheses about group differences in latent intercepts and slopes. Additionally, a theorem is presented which shows that researchers should not employ hierarchical regression to assess intercept differences with selected samples.

A two-step Bayesian propensity score approach is introduced that incorporates prior information in the propensity score equation and outcome equation without the problems associated with simultaneous Bayesian propensity score approaches. The corresponding variance estimators are also provided. The two-step Bayesian propensity score is provided for three methods of implementation: propensity score stratification, weighting, and optimal full matching. Three simulation studies and one case study are presented to elaborate the proposed two-step Bayesian propensity score approach. Results of the simulation studies reveal that greater precision in the propensity score equation yields better recovery of the frequentist-based treatment effect. A slight advantage is shown for the Bayesian approach in small samples. Results also reveal that greater precision around the wrong treatment effect can lead to seriously distorted results. However, greater precision around the correct treatment effect parameter yields quite good results, with slight improvement seen with greater precision in the propensity score equation. A comparison of coverage rates for the conventional frequentist approach and proposed Bayesian approach is also provided. The case study reveals that credible intervals are wider than frequentist confidence intervals when priors are non-informative.