As item response models gain increased popularity in large-scale educational and measurement testing situations, many studies have been conducted on the development and applications of unidimensional and multidimensional models. Recently, attention has been paid to IRT-based models with an overall ability dimension underlying several ability dimensions specific for individual test items, where the focus is mainly on models with dichotomous latent traits. The purpose of this study is to propose such models with continuous latent traits under the Bayesian framework. The proposed models are further compared with the conventional IRT models using Bayesian model choice techniques. The results from simulation studies as well as actual data suggest that (a) such models can be developed; (b) compared with the unidimensional IRT model, the proposed models better describe the actual data; and (c) the use of the proposed IRT models and the multiunidimensional model should be based on different beliefs about the underlying dimensional structure of a test.
Albert, J.H. (1992). Bayesian estimation of normal ogive item response curves using Gibbs sampling. Journal of Educational Statistics , 17, 251-269.
2.
Baker, F.B. (1998). An investigation of the item parameter recovery characteristics of a Gibbs sampling procedure. Applied Psychological Measurement, 22, 163-169.
3.
Béguin, A.A., & Glas, C.A.W. (2001). MCMC estimation and some model-fit analysis of multidimensional IRT models. Psychometrika, 66, 541-562.
4.
Bradlow, E.T., Wainer, H., & Wang, X. (1999). A Bayesian random effects model for testlets. Psychometrika, 64, 153-168.
5.
Brooks, S.P., & Gelman, A. (1998). General methods for monitoring convergence of iterative simulations. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics, 7, 434-455.
6.
Carlin, B.P., & Chib, S. (1993). Bayesian model choice via Markov chain Monte Carlo (Research Report 93-006). Division of Biostatistics, University of Minnesota.
7.
Carlin, B.P., & Louis, T.A. (2000). Bayes and empirical Bayes methods for data analysis . London: Chapman & Hall.
8.
Chib, S. (1995). Marginal likelihood from the Gibbs output. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 90, 1313-1321.
9.
Chib, S., & Greenberg, E. (1995). Understanding the Metropolis-Hastings algorithm . American Statistician, 49, 327-335.
10.
Chib, S., & Jeliazkov, I. (2001). Marginal likelihood from the Metropolis-Hastings output. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 96, 1197-1208.
11.
De Champlain, A.F., & Gessaroli, M.E. (1998). Assessing the dimensionality of item response matrices with small sample sizes and short test lengths. Applied Measurement in Education, 11, 231-253.
12.
de la Torre, J., & Douglas, J.A. (2004). Higher-order latent trait models for cognitive diagnosis. Psychometrika, 69, 333-353.
13.
Gelman, A., Carlin, J.B., Stern, H.S., & Rubin, D.B. (2004). Bayesian data analysis. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall.
14.
Gessaroli, M.E., & De Champlain, A.F. (1996). Using an approximate chi-square statistic to test the number of dimensions underlying the responses to a set of items. Journal of Educational Measurement, 33, 157-179.
15.
Hattie, J. (1985). Methodology review: Assessing unidimensionality of tests and items. Applied Psychological Measurement, 9, 139-164.
16.
Hattie, J., Krakowski, K., Rogers, H.J., & Swaminathan, H. (1996). An assessment of Stout's index of essential unidimensionality. Applied Psychological Measurement, 20; 1-14.
17.
Hoijtink, H., & Molenaar, I.W. (1997). A multidimensional item response model: Constrained latent class analysis using the Gibbs sampler and posterior predictive checks. Psychometrika, 62, 171-189.
18.
Johnson, V.E., & Albert, J.H. (1999). Ordinal data modeling. New York: Springer-Verlag.
19.
Kass, R.E., & Raftery, A.E. (1995). Bayes factors. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 90, 773-795.
20.
Lee, H. (1995). Markov chain Monte Carlo methods for estimating multidimensional ability in item response analysis. Unpublished dissertation, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO.
21.
Meng, X.L., & Schilling, S. (2002). Warp bridge sampling. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics, 11, 552-586.
22.
Meng, X.L., & Wong, W.H. (1996). Simulating ratios of normalizing constants via a simple identity: A theoretical exploration. Statistica Sinica , 6, 831-860.
23.
Newton, M.A., & Raftery, A.E. (1994). Approximate Bayesian inference by the weighted likelihood bootstrap (with discussion). Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 56, 3-48.
24.
Patz, R.J., & Junker, B.W. (1999). A straightforward approach to Markov chain Monte Carlo methods for item response models. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 24, 146-178.
25.
Robert, C.P. (2001). The Bayesian choice (2nd ed). New York: Springer.
26.
Schmid, J., & Leiman, J.M. (1957). The development of hierarchical factor solutions . Psychometrika, 22, 53-61.
27.
Segall, D.O. (2002, April). Confirmatory item factor analysis using Markov chain Monte Carlo estimation with applications to online calibration in CAT. Paper presented at the National Council for Measurement in Education (NCME), New Orleans, LA.
Spiegelhalter, D.J., Best, N., & Carlin, B.P. (1998). Bayesian deviance, the effective number of parameters, and the comparison of arbitrarily complex models. Research Report 98-009, Division of Biostatistics, University of Minnesota.
30.
van der Linden, W. J., & Hambleton, R. K. (Eds.). (1997). Handbook of modern item response theory. New York: Springer.
