An Empirically Based Method of Q‐Matrix Validation for the DINA Model: Development and Applications

By Jimmy de la Torre. 2008

302 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Artificial Intelligence, Management Science and Operations Research

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/9f745ce3bc9a31f8fcca703ac97ff2394f3a1535

How researchers see this paper

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

In Artificial Intelligence

In Management Science and Operations Research

Citations in the corpus

Analysis of Clinical Data From a Cognitive Diagnosis Modeling Framework (2018, methodology): “One such method is the empirical approach developed by de la Torre and Chiu (2016) that can be used in conjunction with the G-DINA model. In addition to ensuring the optimality of the Q-matrix, this method can determine to what extent the empirical data validate the judgments used by clinicians in e”
A Cognitive Diagnostic Modeling of Attribute Mastery in Massachusetts, Minnesota, and the U.S. National Sample Using the TIMSS 2007 (2011, methodology): “The computer program Ox (Doornik, 2002), available free of charge for academic research and teaching purposes, was implemented to run the EM algorithm for the DINA model, which was originally developed in de la Torre (2009). Model fit was also evaluated using information criteria measures that used ”
On the Estimation of Standard Errors in Cognitive Diagnosis Models (2018, methodology): “and can be maximized using the EM algorithm as described in de la Torre (2009). The estimation procedure provides the posterior probability for each latent class, b Prð ljxiÞ, that can be used to find bπ and the attribute profiles b i.”
The Generalized DINA Model Framework. (2011, methodology): “For example, one can investigate whether the procedure of empirically validating the Q-matrix for the DINA model ( de la Torre, 2008 ) can be extended to the G-DINA model as a tool for examining the appropriateness of Q-matrix specifications across different types of CDMs.”
Statistical Refinement of the Q-Matrix in Cognitive Diagnosis (2013, methodology): “Various solutions to this problem have been proposed (e.g., Barnes, 2010; de la Torre, 2008; de la Torre & Chiu, 2010; Liu et al., 2012), but computational feasibility, the identification of misspecified q-entries, and the difficulty of distinguishing between a misspecified Qmatrix and a genuinely…”