Unique Characteristics of Diagnostic Classification Models: A Comprehensive Review of the Current State-of-the-Art

334 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

A Note on Comparing Examinee Classification Methods for Cognitive Diagnosis Models (2011, background): “Many varieties of CDMs based on different statistical models have been proposed; for detailed descriptions and taxonomies of many current CDMs, see Rupp and Templin (2008) and DiBello, Roussos, and Stout (2007).”
On the Analysis of Fraction Subtraction Data: The DINA Model, Classification, Latent Class Sizes, and the Q-Matrix (2011, methodology): “Note that problems such as the above can be avoided if, for each of the skills, there are items that load solely on that skill (given that CDMs are a type of discrete factor model); this type of Q-matrix has been used in some simulations (e.g., Rupp & Templin, 2008b).”
Estimating Classification Consistency and Accuracy for Cognitive Diagnostic Assessment. (2012, methodology): “Rupp and Templin (2008) provide a review of many currently existing models.”