ESTIMATION OF ITEM RESPONSE THEORY MODELS WHEN ABILITY IS UNIFORMLY DISTRIBUTED
Keywords:
Item response theory, IRT, uniform distribution, normal distribution, abilityAbstract
Item Response Theory (IRT) models traditionally assume a normal distribution for ability. Although normality is often a reasonable assumption for ability, it is rarely met for observed scores in educational and psychological measurement. Assumptions regarding ability distribution were previously shown to have an effect on IRT parameter estimation. In this study, the normal and uniform distribution assumptions for ability were compared for IRT parameter estimation, when the actual distribution was either normal or uniform. Uniform distribution assumption in 2PL model yielded more accurate estimates of ability independent of the actual ability distribution. Similarly, a uniform distribution assumption for ability yielded more accurate estimates of ability in 3PL model when the actual ability distribution was uniform. For Rasch model, there was not an explicit pattern for comparing accuracy of ability estimates from uniform and normal distribution assumptions.Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2017 The Eurasia Proceedings of Educational and Social Sciences
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
The articles may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Authors alone are responsible for the contents of their articles. The journal owns the copyright of the articles. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of the research material. All authors are requested to disclose any actual or potential conflict of interest including any financial, personal or other relationships with other people or organizations regarding the submitted work.