Estimation of IRT Graded Response Models: Limited Versus Full Information Methods

172Citations
Citations of this article
162Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

The performance of parameter estimates and standard errors in estimating F. Samejima's graded response model was examined across 324 conditions. Full information maximum likelihood (FIML) was compared with a 3-stage estimator for categorical item factor analysis (CIFA) when the unweighted least squares method was used in CIFA's third stage. CIFA is much faster in estimating multidimensional models, particularly with correlated dimensions. Overall, CIFA yields slightly more accurate parameter estimates, and FIML yields slightly more accurate standard errors. Yet, across most conditions, differences between methods are negligible. FIML is the best election in small sample sizes (200 observations). CIFA is the best election in larger samples (on computational grounds). Both methods failed in a number of conditions, most of which involved 200 observations, few indicators per dimension, highly skewed items, or low factor loadings. These conditions are to be avoided in applications. © 2009 American Psychological Association.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Forero, C. G., & Maydeu-Olivares, A. (2009). Estimation of IRT Graded Response Models: Limited Versus Full Information Methods. Psychological Methods, 14(3), 275–299. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015825

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free