Two-group classification in latent trait theory: Scores with monotone likelihood ratio

This paper deals with two-group classification when a unidimensional latent trait,, is appropriate for explaining the data,X. It is shown that ifX has monotone likelihood ratio then optimal allocation rules can be based on its magnitude when allocation must be made to one of two groups related to. These groups may relate to probabilistically via a non-decreasing functionp(), or may be defined by all subjects above or below a selected value on.In the case where the data arise from dichotomous items, then only the assumption that the items have nondecreasing item characteristic functions is enough to ensure that the unweighted sum of responses (the number-right score or raw score) possesses this fundamental monotone likelihood ratio property.     

Polytomous IRT models and monotone likelihood ratio of the total score

In a broad class of item response theory (IRT) models for dichotomous items the unweighted total score has monotone likelihood ratio (MLR) in the latent trait. In this study, it is shown that for polytomous items MLR holds for the partial credit model and a trivial generalization of this model. MLR does not necessarily hold if the slopes of the item step response functions vary over items, item steps, or both. MLR holds neither for Samejima's graded response model, nor for nonparametric versions of these three polytomous models. These results are surprising in the context of Grayson's and Huynh's results on MLR for nonparametric dichotomous IRT models, and suggest that establishing stochastic ordering properties for nonparametric polytomous IRT models will be much harder.Hemker's research was supported by the Netherlands Research Council, Grant 575-67-034. Junker's research was supported in part by the National Institutes of Health, Grant CA54852, and by the National Science Foundation, Grant DMS-94.04438.     

A note on the computation of the second-order derivatives of the elementary symmetric functions in the rasch model

Jansen (1984) gave explicit formulas for the computation of the second-order derivatives of the elementary symmetric functions. But they are only applicable to those pairs of items which have unequal parameters. It is shown here that for equal parameters similar explicit formulas do exist, too, facilitating the application of the Newton-Raphson procedure to estimate the parameters in the Rasch model and related models according to the conditional maximum likelihood principle.The author wishes to thank the reviewers for their helpful comments on an earlier draft of this paper.     

Power of the likelihood ratio test in covariance structure analysis

A procedure for computing the power of the likelihood ratio test used in the context of covariance structure analysis is derived. The procedure uses statistics associated with the standard output of the computer programs commonly used and assumes that a specific alternative value of the parameter vector is specified. Using the noncentral Chi-square distribution, the power of the test is approximated by the asymptotic one for a sequence of local alternatives. The procedure is illustrated by an example. A Monte Carlo experiment also shows how good the approximation is for a specific case.This research was made possible by a grant from the Dutch Organization for Advancement of Pure Research (ZWO). The authors also like to acknowledge the helpful comments and suggestions from the editor and anonymous reviewers.     

Decomposition of a Rasch partial credit item into independent binary and indecomposable trinary items

For each Rasch (Masters) partial credit item, there exists a set of independent Rasch binary and indecomposable trinary items for which the sum of the scores and the partial credit score have identical probability density functions. If each indecomposable trinary item is further expressed as the sum of two binary items, then the binary items are positively dependent and cannot be both of the Rasch type. This paper was written while the author was working with Steve Ferrara and Hillary Michaels on some technical aspects of the Maryland School Performance Assessment Program. The author had been puzzled by the fact that most MSPAP assessment items have three or less score categories. With a psychometric justification now being apparent, this paper is dedicated to both of them.     

Testing for selectivity in the dependence of random variables on external factors

Random variables A and B, whose joint distribution depends on factors (x,y), are selectively influenced by x and y, respectively, if A and B can be represented as functions of, respectively, (x,S_A,C) and (y,S_B,C), where S_A,S_B,C are stochastically independent and do not depend on (x,y). Selective influence implies selective dependence of marginal distributions on the respective factors: thus no parameter of A may depend on y. But parameters characterizing stochastic interdependence of A and B, such as their mixed moments, are generally functions of both x and y. We derive two simple necessary conditions for selective dependence of (A,B) on (x,y), which can be used to conduct a potential infinity of selectiveness tests. One condition is that, for any factor values x,x^′ and y,y^′,

s_xy≤s_xy^′+s_x^′y^′+s_x^′y,     

A Statistical Hypothesis Testing Method for the Rank Ordering of the Priorities of the Alternatives in the Analytic Hierarchy Process

In analytic hierarchy process (AHP), a ratio scale (π₁, π₂, ⋯, π_t) for the priorities of the alternatives {T₁, T₂, ⋯, T_t} is used for a decision problem in which π_i/π_j is used to quantify the ratio of the priority of T_i to that of T_j. In a group decision‐making setup, the subjective estimates of π_i/π_j are obtained as entries of a pairwise comparison matrix for each member of the group. On the basis of these pairwise comparison matrices, one of the topics of interest in some situation is the total rank ordering of the priorities of the alternatives. In this article, a statistical method is proposed for testing a specific total rank ordering of the priorities of the alternatives. The method developed is then illustrated using numerical examples. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.