Multimodal Perception of Reachability Expressed Through Locomotion

We investigated the information that supports perception of whether an object is within reach using a locomotor task. Participants adjusted their own position relative to a fixed target by stepping or by propelling a wheelchair until they judged it to be within reach. The to-be-reached object was presented in virtual reality. The display of the target was driven in real time as a function of the observer's movement, thus depicting a stationary virtual object at a definite distance only through the relation across optical and nonoptical patterns of stimulation. We asked participants to judge the distance they could reach with their unaided hand or when holding a rod that extended their effective reach. They could see neither their body nor the rod thereby limiting available visual information about “reachability.” As expected, our results showed that despite the limited information that was available, participants' locomotor adjustments were influenced by (a) their simulated distance from the target, (b) their arm length, and (c) the presence or absence of the rod. The type of motion (stepping or wheelchair) had little influence. However, judgment accuracy was influenced by participants' initial simulated distance from the target. We compare the performance obtained in our locomotor judgment task with previous studies that have used different methods for measuring perceived reaching-ability. We discuss perceptual information that could have supported performance within the framework of the global array.     

Uncovering Substantive Patterns in Student Responses in International Large-Scale Assessments—Comparing a Latent Class to a Manifest DIF Approach

In this study, we contrast results from two differential item functioning (DIF) approaches (manifest and latent class) by the number of items and sources of items identified as DIF using data from an international reading assessment. The latter approach yielded three latent classes, presenting evidence of heterogeneity in examinee response patterns. It also yielded more DIF items with larger effect sizes and more consistent item response patterns by substantive aspects (e.g., reading comprehension processes and cognitive complexity of items). Based on our findings, we suggest empirically evaluating the homogeneity assumption in international assessments because international populations cannot be assumed to have homogeneous item response patterns. Otherwise, differences in response patterns within these populations may be under-detected when conducting manifest DIF analyses. Detecting differences in item responses across international examinee populations has implications on the generalizability and meaningfulness of DIF findings as they apply to heterogeneous examinee subgroups.