Using Rasch modelling to examine the international personality item pool (IPIP) values in action (VIA) measure of character strengths

This paper investigates the psychometric properties of the values in action (VIA) character strengths (Peterson and Seligman, 2004 Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2004). Character strengths and virtues: A handbook and classification. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]). A sample of 904 South African undergraduate students (female=77%, male=23%, black=70%, mean age=21.07 years, SD age=2.73 years) was assessed using a 380-item questionnaire that included the items from the international personality item pool (IPIP) values in action (VIA) measure of 24 character strengths as well as additional items based on the underlying theory of the particular constructs. Responses were analysed with the Rasch rating scale model. Reliability coefficients were computed for the retained scale items. The majority (21) of the scales demonstrated satisfactory Rasch model fit and good reliability of scores. The finding that a large proportion of strengths exhibited differential item functioning for at least one of (1) gender, (2) ethnicity and (3) home language group, challenges the assumption that character strengths are necessarily accultural, indicating qualitative distinctions in construct conceptualisations and measurement as a function of emic factors.     

Evaluating the Sampling Performance of Exploratory and Cross-Validated DETECT Procedure with Imperfect Models

Among the methods proposed for identifying the number of latent traits in multidimensional IRT models, DETECT has attracted the attention of both methodologists and applied researchers as a nonparametric counterpart to other procedures. The current study investigated the overall performance of the DETECT procedure and its outcomes using a real-data sampling design recommended by MacCallum (2003 MacCallum, R.C. (2003). Working with imperfect models. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 38 (1), 113–139. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15327906MBR3801_5[Taylor &; Francis Online], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]) and compared the results from a purely simulated data set that was generated with a well-specified “perfect” model. The comparison revealed that the sampling behavior of the maximized DETECT value and R-ratio statistics was quite robust to minor factors and other model misspecifications that potentially exist in the real data set, as there were negligible differences between the results of the real and simulated data sets. Item classification accuracy was also nearly identical for the real and simulated data sets. The accuracy of the identified number of dimensions reported by DETECT was the only outcome with an obvious difference between the purely simulated data set and the real data set. While the difference was small for smaller sample sizes, the identified number of dimensions was more accurate for larger sample sizes when the population data set was purely simulated. In many instances, exploratory DETECT analysis outperformed the cross-validated DETECT analysis in terms of overall accuracy.     

基于项目自动生成的认知诊断测验开发

认知诊断、项目自动生成是现代心理测量领域的重要发展领域,二者的结合更是心理测量领域亟待开展的重要课题。本研究以小学数学问题解决认知诊断项目自动生成为例,探讨认知诊断领域的项目生成技术及算法。研究发现：(1)计算机自生成的项目参数与原模板参数具有较高的一致性。(2)同一项目模板下生成的不同试题的测量学特征基本不变。(3)同一批被试在自动生成的两份试卷的前、后测的能力( )值高度相关(r=0.811),前、后两次对被试诊断结果的一致性高达86.5%。这表明本文所设计的认知诊断测验项目的自动生成技术及其算法基本可行,小学数学问题解决认知诊断项目的自动生成效果较好。这也为其它认知诊断领域的项目自动生成提供了技术借鉴和支持。     

题目因素分析：基于SEM和基于IRT的两类方法

心理和教育测量一般只能达到顺序量表的水平,其测量数据与被测因子间并非简单线性关系。题目因素分析是用来描述测量题目与因子间非线性关系的统计模型。题目因素分析主要有基于结构方程模型和基于项目反应理论两类方法,两类方法之间存在紧密的联系,甚至可以看作是同一模型的两种表现形式。本文详细阐述了该关系,同时对两类方法在参数估计、模型拟合指标、测量一致性检验和支撑软件等方面的特点进行了分析和比较,以便研究者选择最为适合其研究的方法。     

Exploring the validity of scores from the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES) in Burundi: A multi-strategy approach

The present study aimed to validate the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES) in Burundi, through a multi-strategy approach used in cross-cultural studies. Respondents were 906 health workers (men = 56%; caregivers 60%). They responded to a bilingual version of RSES. We utilised Confirmatory Factorial Analysis (CFA) with structural equation modelling and a back translation test to explore the structure of the RSES and the reliability of scores from the scale. Data from an independent sample were analysed for the reliability of scores assessment. CFA results suggested that the global RSES factor was likely contaminated by a method-effect; mainly associated with negatively worded items. Internal consistencies and a back-translation test demonstrated that the negatively worded items were unsuitable in this context. The independent sample study confirmed poor reliability and internal consistency of scores for both alternative language versions of the RSES. Our data suggested that an overall cultural effect, rather than a merely specific language effect, may undermine the cross-cultural transportability of the Western scale.     

The factor structure of the Social Axioms Survey II (SASII) in the South African context

The objective of this study was to validate the new Social Axioms Survey II (SASII). The study sample comprised university students (n = 793) as well as their family members and friends (n = 645). Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) following an initial exploratory factor analysis yielded a five-factor model: social cynicism, social complexity, reward for application, religiosity, and fate control. The findings of this study support the use of the new SASII in South Africa for research purposes.     

Investigating Separate and Concurrent Approaches for Item Parameter Drift in 3PL Item Response Theory Equating

This study examines separate and concurrent approaches to combine the detection of item parameter drift (IPD) and the estimation of scale transformation coefficients in the context of the common item nonequivalent groups design with the three-parameter item response theory equating. The study uses real and synthetic data sets to compare the two approaches based on IPD flagging rates, type I error and power rates, and recovery of scale transformation coefficients. Results indicate that the two approaches render similar outcomes with stable anchor sets. However, they can produce dissimilar results with unstable anchor sets because of differences in the performance of their IPD components. Further, the findings of this study caution about working backward from equated cut scores to motivate the selection of an anchor set.     

改进的MCMC算法及其在估计IRT模型参数中的应用

本文首先简要的阐述了MCMC算法的思想及在IRT参数估计中的操作过程;其次,针对该算法存在的一些问题,提出相应的改进建议;然后,分别运用传统的和改进型的MCMC算法进行模拟数据分析和比较,结果显示新的方法表现更好;最后总结新方法的优点所在,并指出下一步的研究方向。     

自定步调学习时间的习惯性反应：来自眼动的证据

习惯性反应指学习者根据自身阅读习惯来进行学习时间分配,它通常由词对位置这一外部线索激发。研究运用眼动记录技术,采用Metcalfe范式探讨词对位置和难度对学习时间分配的影响,以检验自定步调学习时间的习惯性反应。结果发现：（1）在自定步调总学习时间上,学习者倾向于对难度越大的项目分配越多的学习时间;（2）在前期自定步调学习进程上,当词对位置为易-中-难条件时,学习者倾向于优先在容易项目上分配较多的学习时间,接着是中等难度项目,最后是困难项目;当词对位置为难-中-易条件时,结果相反。这说明学习者的自定步调总学习时间受项目难度驱动,而前期自定步调学习时间受习惯性反应影响。     

How to get really smart: Modeling retest and training effects in ability testing using computer-generated figural matrix items

The interpretation of retest scores is problematic because they are potentially affected by measurement and predictive bias, which impact construct validity, and because their size differs as a function of various factors. This paper investigates the construct stability of scores on a figural matrices test and models retest effects at the level of the individual test taker as a function of covariates (simple retest vs. training, use of identical vs. parallel retest forms, and general mental ability). A total of N = 189 subjects took two tests of matrix items that were automatically generated according to a strict construction rationale. Between test administrations, participants in the intervention groups received training, while controls did not. The Rasch model fit the data at both time points, but there was a lack of item difficulty parameter invariance across time. Training increased test performance beyond simple retesting, but there was no large difference between the identical and parallel retest forms at the individual level. Individuals varied greatly in how they profited from retest experience, training, and the use of identical vs. parallel retest forms. The results suggest that even with carefully designed tasks, it is problematic to directly compare scores from initial tests and retests. Test administrators should emphasize learning potential instead of state level assessment, and inter-individual differences with regard to test experience should be taken into account when interpreting test results.