Using Multidimensional Item Response Theory to Evaluate Educational and Psychological Tests
By Terry A. Ackerman, Mark J. Gierl, Cindy M. Walker. 2005
202 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Computer Networks and Communications, Developmental and Educational Psychology, Management Science and Operations Research
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/37324abaefd8c43b20154e788cc1dbdf97d44d42
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Computer Networks and Communications
- Sandip Sinharay
- S. Haberman
- Gautam Puhan
- Hiroki Sayama
- Vahid Aryadoust
- Li Ying Ng
- Cindy M. Walker
- Li Cai
In Developmental and Educational Psychology
In Management Science and Operations Research
- Sandip Sinharay
- Gautam Puhan
- S. Haberman
- Hiroki Sayama
- Vahid Aryadoust
- Li Ying Ng
- Cindy M. Walker
- Daniel A. Sass
Citations in the corpus
- An NCME Instructional Module on Subscores (2011, methodology): “Researchers, such as Luecht (2003), de la Torre and Patz (2005), and Haberman and Sinharay (2010) examined the reporting of estimated ability parameters using MIRT models (e.g., Reckase, 1997; Ackerman et al., 2003).”
- A comprehensive review of Rasch measurement in language assessment: Recommendations and guidelines for research (2020, methodology): “Common methods to check unidimensionality are: • Principal component analysis of residuals • Factor or principal component analysis • Infit and outfit statistics Ackerman et al. (2003); Raîche (2005); Tennant & Pallant (2006); Wright (1994b);”
- What’s the DIF? Why Differential Item Functioning Analyses Are an Important Part of Instrument Development and Validation (2011, methodology): “Of course this belief can be substantiated by conducting dimensionality analyses (see, for example, Ackerman et al., 2003).”