It is shown that measurement error in predictor variables can be modeled using item response theory (IRT). The predictor variables, that may be defined at any level of an hierarchical regression model, are treated as latent variables. The normal ogive model is used to describe the relation between the latent variables and dichotomous observed variables, which may be responses to tests or questionnaires. It will be shown that the multilevel model with measurement error in the observed predictor variables can be estimated in a Bayesian framework using Gibbs sampling. In this article, handling measurement error via the normal ogive model is compared with alternative approaches using the classical true score model. Examples using real data are given.

A method of the IRT observed-score equating using chain equating through a third test without equating coefficients is presented with the assumption of the three-parameter logistic model. The asymptotic standard errors of the equated scores by this method are obtained using the results given by M. Liou and P.E. Cheng. The asymptotic standard errors of the IRT observed-score equating method using a synthetic examinee group with equating coefficients, which is a currently used method, are also provided. Numerical examples show that the standard errors by these observed-score equating methods are similar to those by the corresponding true score equating methods except in the range of low scores.

A normally distributed person-fit index is proposed for detecting aberrant response patterns in latent class models and mixture distribution IRT models for dichotomous and polytomous data.

This article extends previous work on the null distribution of person-fit indices for the dichotomous Rasch model to a number of models for categorical data. A comparison of two different approaches to handle the skewness of the person-fit index distribution is included.

A new model selection statistical test is proposed for testing the null hypothesis that two probability models equally effectively fit the underlying data generating process (DGP). The new model selection test, called the Discrepancy Risk Model Selection Test (DRMST), extends previous work (see Vuong, 1989) on this problem in four distinct ways. First, generalized goodness-of-fit measures (which include log-likelihood functions) can be used. Second, unlike the classical likelihood ratio test, the models are not required to be fully nested where the nesting concept is defined for generalized goodness-of-fit measures. The DRMST also differs from the likelihood ratio test by not requiring that either competing model provides a completely accurate representation of the DGP. And, fourth, the DRMST may be used to compare competing time-series models using correlated observations as well as data consisting of independent and identically distributed observations.

A lognormal model for response times is used to check response times for aberrances in examinee behavior on computerized adaptive tests. Both classical procedures and Bayesian posterior predictive checks are presented. For a fixed examinee, responses and response times are independent; checks based on response times offer thus information independent of the results of checks on response patterns. Empirical examples of the use of classical and Bayesian checks for detecting two different types of aberrances in response times are presented. The detection rates for the Bayesian checks outperformed those for the classical checks, but at the cost of higher false-alarm rates. A guideline for the choice between the two types of checks is offered.

We propose a unifying framework for multilevel modeling of polytomous data and rankings, accommodating dependence induced by factor and/or random coefficient structures at different levels. The framework subsumes a wide range of models proposed in disparate methodological literatures. Partial and tied rankings, alternative specific explanatory variables and alternative sets varying across units are handled. The problem of identification is addressed. We develop an estimation and prediction methodology for the model framework which is implemented in the generally available gllamm software. The methodology is applied to party choice and rankings from the 1987–1992 panel of the British Election Study. Three levels are considered: elections, voters and constituencies.

Studies of agreement commonly occur in psychiatric research. For example, researchers are often interested in the agreement among radiologists in their review of brain scans of elderly patients with dementia or in the agreement among multiple informant reports of psychopathology in children. In this paper, we consider the agreement between two raters when rating a dichotomous outcome (e.g., presence or absence of psychopathology). In particular, we consider logistic regression models that allow agreement to depend on both rater- and subject-level covariates. Logistic regression has been proposed as a simple method for identifying covariates that are predictive of agreement (Coughlin et al., 1992). However, this approach is problematic since it does not take account of agreement due to chance alone. As a result, a spurious association between the probability (or odds) of agreement and a covariate could arise due entirely to chance agreement. That is, if the prevalence of the dichotomous outcome varies among subgroups of the population, then covariates that identify the subgroups may appear to be predictive of agreement. In this paper we propose a modification to the standard logistic regression model in order to take proper account of chance agreement. An attractive feature of the proposed method is that it can be easily implemented using existing statistical software for logistic regression. The proposed method is motivated by data from the Connecticut Child Study (Zahner et al., 1992) on the agreement among parent and teacher reports of psychopathology in children. In this study, parents and teachers provide dichotomous assessments of a child's psychopathology and it is of interest to examine whether agreement among the parent and teacher reports is related to the age and gender of the child and to the time elapsed between parent and teacher assessments of the child.

Relationships between the results of factor analysis and component analysis are derived when oblique factors have independent clusters with equal variances of unique factors. The factor loadings are analytically shown to be smaller than the corresponding component loadings while the factor correlations are shown to be greater than the corresponding component correlations. The condition for the inequality of the factor/component contributions is derived in the case with different variances for unique factors. Further, the asymptotic standard errors of parameter estimates are obtained for a simplified model with the assumption of multivariate normality, which shows that the component loading estimate is more stable than the corresponding factor loading estimate.