Two new test statistics for the rasch model

It is shown that the presently available statistical tests for the Rasch model are insensitive to violation of the unidimensionality axiom. Two new test statistics are presented. The first one,Q ₁, is sensitive to the same effects as the presently available statistics, but has some desirable properties of a nonstatistical nature. The second statistic,Q ₂, is sensitive to violation of local stochastic independence and unidimensionality and thus fills an existing gap.     

Limited‐information goodness‐of‐fit testing of hierarchical item factor models

In applications of item response theory, assessment of model fit is a critical issue. Recently, limited‐information goodness‐of‐fit testing has received increased attention in the psychometrics literature. In contrast to full‐information test statistics such as Pearson’s X² or the likelihood ratio G², these limited‐information tests utilize lower‐order marginal tables rather than the full contingency table. A notable example is Maydeu‐Olivares and colleagues’M₂ family of statistics based on univariate and bivariate margins. When the contingency table is sparse, tests based on M₂ retain better Type I error rate control than the full‐information tests and can be more powerful. While in principle the M₂ statistic can be extended to test hierarchical multidimensional item factor models (e.g., bifactor and testlet models), the computation is non‐trivial. To obtain M₂, a researcher often has to obtain (many thousands of) marginal probabilities, derivatives, and weights. Each of these must be approximated with high‐dimensional numerical integration. We propose a dimension reduction method that can take advantage of the hierarchical factor structure so that the integrals can be approximated far more efficiently. We also propose a new test statistic that can be substantially better calibrated and more powerful than the original M₂ statistic when the test is long and the items are polytomous. We use simulations to demonstrate the performance of our new methods and illustrate their effectiveness with applications to real data.     

Marginal likelihood inference for a model for item responses and response times

Marginal maximum‐likelihood procedures for parameter estimation and testing the fit of a hierarchical model for speed and accuracy on test items are presented. The model is a composition of two first‐level models for dichotomous responses and response times along with multivariate normal models for their item and person parameters. It is shown how the item parameters can easily be estimated using Fisher's identity. To test the fit of the model, Lagrange multiplier tests of the assumptions of subpopulation invariance of the item parameters (i.e., no differential item functioning), the shape of the response functions, and three different types of conditional independence were derived. Simulation studies were used to show the feasibility of the estimation and testing procedures and to estimate the power and Type I error rate of the latter. In addition, the procedures were applied to an empirical data set from a computerized adaptive test of language comprehension.     

An improved Hochberg procedure for multiple tests of significance

We propose a simple modification of Hochberg's step‐up Bonferroni procedure for multiple tests of significance. The proposed procedure is always more powerful than Hochberg's procedure for more than two tests, and is more powerful than Hommel's procedure for three and four tests. A numerical analysis of the new procedure indicates that its Type I error is controlled under independence of the test statistics, at a level equal to or just below the nominal Type I error. Examination of various non‐null configurations of hypotheses shows that the modified procedure has a power advantage over Hochberg's procedure which increases in relationship to the number of false hypotheses.     

Hypothesis tests for population heterogeneity in meta‐analysis

Choice of the appropriate model in meta‐analysis is often treated as an empirical question which is answered by examining the amount of variability in the effect sizes. When all of the observed variability in the effect sizes can be accounted for based on sampling error alone, a set of effect sizes is said to be homogeneous and a fixed‐effects model is typically adopted. Whether a set of effect sizes is homogeneous or not is usually tested with the so‐called Q test. In this paper, a variety of alternative homogeneity tests – the likelihood ratio, Wald and score tests – are compared with the Q test in terms of their Type I error rate and power for four different effect size measures. Monte Carlo simulations show that the Q test kept the tightest control of the Type I error rate, although the results emphasize the importance of large sample sizes within the set of studies. The results also suggest under what conditions the power of the tests can be considered adequate.     

Identifying the Source of Misfit in Item Response Theory Models

When an item response theory model fails to fit adequately, the items for which the model provides a good fit and those for which it does not must be determined. To this end, we compare the performance of several fit statistics for item pairs with known asymptotic distributions under maximum likelihood estimation of the item parameters: (a) a mean and variance adjustment to bivariate Pearson's X², (b) a bivariate subtable analog to Reiser's (1996) overall goodness-of-fit test, (c) a z statistic for the bivariate residual cross product, and (d) Maydeu-Olivares and Joe's (2006) M₂ statistic applied to bivariate subtables. The unadjusted Pearson's X² with heuristically determined degrees of freedom is also included in the comparison. For binary and ordinal data, our simulation results suggest that the z statistic has the best Type I error and power behavior among all the statistics under investigation when the observed information matrix is used in its computation. However, if one has to use the cross-product information, the mean and variance adjusted X² is recommended. We illustrate the use of pairwise fit statistics in 2 real-data examples and discuss possible extensions of the current research in various directions.     

Comparing score tests and other local dependence diagnostics for the graded response model

Score tests for identifying locally dependent item pairs have been proposed for binary item response models. In this article, both the bifactor and the threshold shift score tests are generalized to the graded response model. For the bifactor test, the generalization is straightforward; it adds one secondary dimension associated only with one pair of items. For the threshold shift test, however, multiple generalizations are possible: in particular, conditional, uniform, and linear shift tests are discussed in this article. Simulation studies show that all of the score tests have accurate Type I error rates given large enough samples, although their small‐sample behaviour is not as good as that of Pearson's Χ² and M₂ as proposed in other studies for the purpose of local dependence (LD) detection. All score tests have the highest power to detect the LD which is consistent with their parametric form, and in this case they are uniformly more powerful than Χ² and M₂; even wrongly specified score tests are more powerful than Χ² and M₂ in most conditions. An example using empirical data is provided for illustration.     

A Person Fit Test For Irt Models For Polytomous Items

A person fit test based on the Lagrange multiplier test is presented for three item response theory models for polytomous items: the generalized partial credit model, the sequential model, and the graded response model. The test can also be used in the framework of multidimensional ability parameters. It is shown that the Lagrange multiplier statistic can take both the effects of estimation of the item parameters and the estimation of the person parameters into account. The Lagrange multiplier statistic has an asymptotic χ²-distribution. The Type I error rate and power are investigated using simulation studies. Results show that test statistics that ignore the effects of estimation of the persons’ ability parameters have decreased Type I error rates and power. Incorporating a correction to account for the effects of the estimation of the persons’ ability parameters results in acceptable Type I error rates and power characteristics; incorporating a correction for the estimation of the item parameters has very little additional effect. It is investigated to what extent the three models give comparable results, both in the simulation studies and in an example using data from the NEO Personality Inventory-Revised.     

Robust step‐down tests for multivariate independent group designs

A composite step‐down procedure, in which a set of step‐down tests are summarized collectively with Fisher's combination statistic, was considered to test for multivariate mean equality in two‐group designs. An approximate degrees of freedom (ADF) composite procedure based on trimmed/Winsorized estimators and a non‐pooled estimate of error variance is proposed, and compared to a composite procedure based on trimmed/Winsorized estimators and a pooled estimate of error variance. The step‐down procedures were also compared to Hotelling's T² and Johansen's ADF global procedure based on trimmed estimators in a simulation study. Type I error rates of the pooled step‐down procedure were sensitive to covariance heterogeneity in unbalanced designs; error rates were similar to those of Hotelling's T² across all of the investigated conditions. Type I error rates of the ADF composite step‐down procedure were insensitive to covariance heterogeneity and less sensitive to the number of dependent variables when sample size was small than error rates of Johansen's test. The ADF composite step‐down procedure is recommended for testing hypotheses of mean equality in two‐group designs except when the data are sampled from populations with different degrees of multivariate skewness.     

How Should We Assess the Fit of Rasch-Type Models? Approximating the Power of Goodness-of-Fit Statistics in Categorical Data Analysis

We investigate the performance of three statistics, R ₁, R ₂ (Glas in Psychometrika 53:525–546, 1988), and M ₂ (Maydeu-Olivares & Joe in J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 100:1009–1020, 2005, Psychometrika 71:713–732, 2006) to assess the overall fit of a one-parameter logistic model (1PL) estimated by (marginal) maximum likelihood (ML). R ₁ and R ₂ were specifically designed to target specific assumptions of Rasch models, whereas M ₂ is a general purpose test statistic. We report asymptotic power rates under some interesting violations of model assumptions (different item discrimination, presence of guessing, and multidimensionality) as well as empirical rejection rates for correctly specified models and some misspecified models. All three statistics were found to be more powerful than Pearson’s X ² against two- and three-parameter logistic alternatives (2PL and 3PL), and against multidimensional 1PL models. The results suggest that there is no clear advantage in using goodness-of-fit statistics specifically designed for Rasch-type models to test these models when marginal ML estimation is used.     

Testing overall and moderator effects in random effects meta‐regression

Random effects meta‐regression is a technique to synthesize results of multiple studies. It allows for a test of an overall effect, as well as for tests of effects of study characteristics, that is, (discrete or continuous) moderator effects. We describe various procedures to test moderator effects: the z, t, likelihood ratio (LR), Bartlett‐corrected LR (BcLR), and resampling tests. We compare the Type I error of these tests, and conclude that the common z test, and to a lesser extent the LR test, do not perform well since they may yield Type I error rates appreciably larger than the chosen alpha. The error rate of the resampling test is accurate, closely followed by the BcLR test. The error rate of the t test is less accurate but arguably tolerable. With respect to statistical power, the BcLR and t tests slightly outperform the resampling test. Therefore, our recommendation is to use either the resampling or the BcLR test. If these statistics are unavailable, then the t test should be used since it is certainly superior to the z test.     

A mixture hierarchical model for response times and response accuracy

In real testing, examinees may manifest different types of test‐taking behaviours. In this paper we focus on two types that appear to be among the more frequently occurring behaviours – solution behaviour and rapid guessing behaviour. Rapid guessing usually happens in high‐stakes tests when there is insufficient time, and in low‐stakes tests when there is lack of effort. These two qualitatively different test‐taking behaviours, if ignored, will lead to violation of the local independence assumption and, as a result, yield biased item/person parameter estimation. We propose a mixture hierarchical model to account for differences among item responses and response time patterns arising from these two behaviours. The model is also able to identify the specific behaviour an examinee engages in when answering an item. A Monte Carlo expectation maximization algorithm is proposed for model calibration. A simulation study shows that the new model yields more accurate item and person parameter estimates than a non‐mixture model when the data indeed come from two types of behaviour. The model also fits real, high‐stakes test data better than a non‐mixture model, and therefore the new model can better identify the underlying test‐taking behaviour an examinee engages in on a certain item.     

Bayesian item fit analysis for unidimensional item response theory models

Assessing item fit for unidimensional item response theory models for dichotomous items has always been an issue of enormous interest, but there exists no unanimously agreed item fit diagnostic for these models, and hence there is room for further investigation of the area. This paper employs the posterior predictive model‐checking method, a popular Bayesian model‐checking tool, to examine item fit for the above‐mentioned models. An item fit plot, comparing the observed and predicted proportion‐correct scores of examinees with different raw scores, is suggested. This paper also suggests how to obtain posterior predictive p‐values (which are natural Bayesian p‐values) for the item fit statistics of Orlando and Thissen that summarize numerically the information in the above‐mentioned item fit plots. A number of simulation studies and a real data application demonstrate the effectiveness of the suggested item fit diagnostics. The suggested techniques seem to have adequate power and reasonable Type I error rate, and psychometricians will find them promising.     

The use of item scores and response times to detect examinees who may have benefited from item preknowledge

According to Wollack and Schoenig (2018, The Sage encyclopedia of educational research, measurement, and evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 260), benefiting from item preknowledge is one of the three broad types of test fraud that occur in educational assessments. We use tools from constrained statistical inference to suggest a new statistic that is based on item scores and response times and can be used to detect examinees who may have benefited from item preknowledge for the case when the set of compromised items is known. The asymptotic distribution of the new statistic under no preknowledge is proved to be a simple mixture of two χ² distributions. We perform a detailed simulation study to show that the Type I error rate of the new statistic is very close to the nominal level and that the power of the new statistic is satisfactory in comparison to that of the existing statistics for detecting item preknowledge based on both item scores and response times. We also include a real data example to demonstrate the usefulness of the suggested statistic.     

Detecting a lack of association: An equivalence testing approach

Researchers often test for a lack of association between variables. A lack of association is usually established by demonstrating a non‐significant relationship with a traditional test (e.g., Pearson's r). However, for logical as well as statistical reasons, such conclusions are problematic. In this paper, we discuss and compare the empirical Type I error and power rates of three lack of association tests. The results indicate that large, sometimes very large, sample sizes are required for the test statistics to be appropriate. What is especially problematic is that the required sample sizes may exceed what is practically feasible for the conditions that are expected to be common among researchers in psychology. This paper highlights the importance of using available lack of association tests, instead of traditional tests of association, for demonstrating the independence of variables, and qualifies the conditions under which these tests are appropriate.     

Monte Carlo tests of the Rasch model based on scalability coefficients

For item responses fitting the Rasch model, the assumptions underlying the Mokken model of double monotonicity are met. This makes non‐parametric item response theory a natural starting‐point for Rasch item analysis. This paper studies scalability coefficients based on Loevinger's H coefficient that summarizes the number of Guttman errors in the data matrix. These coefficients are shown to yield efficient tests of the Rasch model using p‐values computed using Markov chain Monte Carlo methods. The power of the tests of unequal item discrimination, and their ability to distinguish between local dependence and unequal item discrimination, are discussed. The methods are illustrated and motivated using a simulation study and a real data example.     

Testing for negligible interaction: A coherent and robust approach

Researchers often want to demonstrate a lack of interaction between two categorical predictors on an outcome. To justify a lack of interaction, researchers typically accept the null hypothesis of no interaction from a conventional analysis of variance (ANOVA). This method is inappropriate as failure to reject the null hypothesis does not provide statistical evidence to support a lack of interaction. This study proposes a bootstrap‐based intersection–union test for negligible interaction that provides coherent decisions between the omnibus test and post hoc interaction contrast tests and is robust to violations of the normality and variance homogeneity assumptions. Further, a multiple comparison strategy for testing interaction contrasts following a non‐significant omnibus test is proposed. Our simulation study compared the Type I error control, omnibus power and per‐contrast power of the proposed approach to the non‐centrality‐based negligible interaction test of Cheng and Shao (2007, Statistica Sinica, 17, 1441). For 2 × 2 designs, the empirical Type I error rates of the Cheng and Shao test were very close to the nominal α level when the normality and variance homogeneity assumptions were satisfied; however, only our proposed bootstrapping approach was satisfactory under non‐normality and/or variance heterogeneity. In general a × b designs, although the omnibus Cheng and Shao test, as expected, is the most powerful, it is not robust to assumption violation and results in incoherent omnibus and interaction contrast decisions that are not possible with the intersection–union approach.     

Limited‐information goodness‐of‐fit testing of diagnostic classification item response models

Despite the growing popularity of diagnostic classification models (e.g., Rupp et al., 2010, Diagnostic measurement: theory, methods, and applications, Guilford Press, New York, NY) in educational and psychological measurement, methods for testing their absolute goodness of fit to real data remain relatively underdeveloped. For tests of reasonable length and for realistic sample size, full‐information test statistics such as Pearson's X² and the likelihood ratio statistic G² suffer from sparseness in the underlying contingency table from which they are computed. Recently, limited‐information fit statistics such as Maydeu‐Olivares and Joe's (2006, Psychometrika, 71, 713) M₂ have been found to be quite useful in testing the overall goodness of fit of item response theory models. In this study, we applied Maydeu‐Olivares and Joe's (2006, Psychometrika, 71, 713) M₂ statistic to diagnostic classification models. Through a series of simulation studies, we found that M₂ is well calibrated across a wide range of diagnostic model structures and was sensitive to certain misspecifications of the item model (e.g., fitting disjunctive models to data generated according to a conjunctive model), errors in the Q‐matrix (adding or omitting paths, omitting a latent variable), and violations of local item independence due to unmodelled testlet effects. On the other hand, M₂ was largely insensitive to misspecifications in the distribution of higher‐order latent dimensions and to the specification of an extraneous attribute. To complement the analyses of the overall model goodness of fit using M₂, we investigated the utility of the Chen and Thissen (1997, J. Educ. Behav. Stat., 22, 265) local dependence statistic $X_{\mathrm{LD}}^2$ for characterizing sources of misfit, an important aspect of model appraisal often overlooked in favour of overall statements. The $X_{\mathrm{LD}}^2$ statistic was found to be slightly conservative (with Type I error rates consistently below the nominal level) but still useful in pinpointing the sources of misfit. Patterns of local dependence arising due to specific model misspecifications are illustrated. Finally, we used the M₂ and $X_{\mathrm{LD}}^2$ statistics to evaluate a diagnostic model fit to data from the Trends in Mathematics and Science Study, drawing upon analyses previously conducted by Lee et al., (2011, IJT, 11, 144).     

New heterogeneous test statistics for the unbalanced fixed‐effect nested design

When the underlying variances are unknown or/and unequal, using the conventional F test is problematic in the two‐factor hierarchical data structure. Prompted by the approximate test statistics (Welch and Alexander–Govern methods), the authors develop four new heterogeneous test statistics to test factor A and factor B nested within A for the unbalanced fixed‐effect two‐stage nested design under variance heterogeneity. The actual significance levels and statistical power of the test statistics were compared in a simulation study. The results show that the proposed procedures maintain better Type I error rate control and have greater statistical power than those obtained by the conventional F test in various conditions. Therefore, the proposed test statistics are recommended in terms of robustness and easy implementation.