Influencia del sesgo de la distribución de habilidad en la distribución del estadístico lz

  1. Núñez Núñez, Rosa María
  2. López Pina, José Antonio
Revista:
Psicothema

ISSN: 0214-9915

Año de publicación: 2004

Volumen: 16

Número: 2

Páginas: 317-324

Tipo: Artículo

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAcceso abierto editor

Otras publicaciones en: Psicothema

Resumen

Influence of the ability distribution skewness on the distribution of statistic lz.The appropriateness measurement statistic lz of Drasgow, Levine & Williams (1985) is a suitable index for detecting aberrant patterns because of its high hit rates. However, the normal distribution of this index is affected, for instance, by the test length, the item response model or the ability distribution. This research analyses the effect of the ability distribution skewness on the distribution of lz, and the test length, the extent of the discrimination parameter and the estimation process of the ability and items are also manipulated. The results show that the distribution of the index lz is aproximately a normal distribution but skewed and sightly leptokurtic; the false positive rates point out that the index lz is a conservative and consistent test in the significance level of .05

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Drasgow, F. y Guertler, E. (1987). A decision-theoretic approach to the use of appropriateness measurement for detecting invalid test and scale scores. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 10-18.
  • Drasgow, F., Levine, M.V. y McLaughlin, M.E. (1987). Detecting inappropriate test scores with optimal and practical appropriateness indices. Applied Psychological Measurement, 11, 59-79.
  • Drasgow, F., Levine, M.V. y Williams, E.A. (1985). Appropriateness measurement with polychotomous item response models and standardized indices. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 38, 67-86.
  • Hambleton, R.K. y Cook, L.L. (1983). Robustness of item response models and effects of test length and sample size on the precision of ability estimates. En D.J. Weiss (Ed.), New horizons in testing: Latent trait test theory and computerized adaptive testing (pp. 31-49). New York: Academic Press.
  • Levine, M.V. y Drasgow, F. (1982). Appropriateness measurement: Review, critique and validating studies. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 35, 42-56.
  • Levine, M.V. y Rubin, B.D. (1979). Measuring the appropriateness of multiple-choice test scores. Journal of Educational Statistics, 4, 269-290.
  • Li, M.F. y Olejnik, S. (1997). The power of Rasch person-fit statistics in detecting unusual response patterns. Applied Psychological Measurement, 21, 215-231.
  • Lilliefors, H.W. (1967). On the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test for normality with mean and variance unknown. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 62, 399-402.
  • Marascuilo, L.A. y McSweeney, M. (1977). Nonparametric and distribution-free methods for social sciences. Monterey, CA: Cole Publishing Company.
  • Martínez-Cardeñoso, J., García Cueto, E. y Muñiz, J. (2000). Efecto del entrenamiento sobre las propiedades psicométricas de los tests. Psicothema, 12, 358-362.
  • Martínez-Cardeñoso, J., Muñiz, J. y García Cueto, E. (2000). Mejora de las puntuaciones de los tests mediante entrenamiento. Psicothema, 12, 363-367.
  • Meijer, R.R. (1997). Person fit and criterion-related validity: An extension of the Schmitt, Cortina y Whitney study. Applied Psychological Measurement, 21, 99-113.
  • Meijer, R.R. (1998). Consistency of test behaviour and individual difference in precision of prediction. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 71, 147-160.
  • Meijer, R.R. y Nering, M.L. (1997). Trait level estimation for nonfitting response vectors. Applied Psychological Measurement, 21, 321-336.
  • Meijer, R.R. y Sijtsma, K. (1999). A review of methods for evaluating the fit of item score patterns on a test (Research Report No. 99-01). Twente, The Netherlands: University of Twente, Department of Educational Measurement and Data Analysis.
  • Meijer, R.R. y Sijtsma, K. (2001). Methodology review: Evaluating person fit. Applied Psychological Measurement, 25, 107-135.
  • Mislevy, R.J. y Bock R.D. (1990). PC-BILOG 3.04: Item analysis and test scoring with binary logistic models. Mooresville, IN: Scientific Software.
  • Molenaar, I.W. y Hoijtink, H. (1990). The many null distributions of person fit indices. Psychometrika, 55, 75-106.
  • Narayanan, P. y Swaminathan, H. (1996). Identification of items that show non-uniform DIF. Applied Psychological Measurement, 20, 257-274.
  • Nering, M.L. (1995). The distribution of person fit using true and estimated person parameters. Applied Psychological Measurement, 19, 121- 129.
  • Nering, M.L. (1997). The distribution of indexes of person fit within the computerized adaptive testing environment. Applied Psychological Measurement, 21, 115-127.
  • Noonan, B.W., Boss, M.W. y Gessaroli, M.E. (1992). The effect of test length and IRT model on the distribution and stability of three appropriateness indexes. Applied Psychological Measurement, 16, 345-352.
  • Reise, S.P. (1995). Scoring method and the detection of person misfit in a personality assessment context. Applied Psychological Measurement, 19, 213-229.
  • Reise, S.P. y Due, A.M. (1991). The influence of test characteristics on the detection of aberrant response patterns. Applied Psychological Measurement, 15, 217-226.
  • Reise, S.P. y Flannery, Wm. P. (1996). Assessing person-fit on measures of typical performance. Applied Measurement in Education, 9, 9-26.
  • Schmitt, N., Chan, D., Sacco, J.M., McFarland, L.A. y Jennings, D. (1999). Correlates of person fit and effect of person fit on test validity. Applied Psychological Measurement, 23, 41-53.
  • Schmitt, N., Cortina, J.M. y Whitney, D.J. (1993). Appropriateness fit and criterion-related validity. Applied Psychological Measurement, 17, 143-150.
  • SYSTAT v. 10.0. [Computer software]. (2000). Chicago: SPSS, Inc. van Krimpen-Stoop, E.M.L.A. y Meijer, R.R. (1999). The null distribution of person-fit statistics for conventional and adaptive tests. Applied Psychological Measurement, 23, 327-345.
  • van Krimpen-Stoop, E.M.L.A. y Meijer, R.R. (2000). Detecting personmisfit in adaptive testing using statistical process control techniques. En W.J. van der Linden y C.A.W. Glas (Eds.), Computerized adaptive testing: Theory and practice (pp. 201-219). Boston: Kluwer-Nijhoff Publishing.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet