, Volume 45, Issue 4, pp 479–494 | Cite as

Multicomponent latent trait models for ability tests

  • Susan E. Whitely


A major research direction for ability measurement has been to identify the information-processes that are involved in solving test items through mathematical modeling of item difficulty. However, this research has had limited impact on ability measurement, since person parameters are not included in the process models. The current paper presents some multicomponent latent trait models for reproducing test performance from both item and person parameters on processing components. Components are identified from item subtasks, in which performance is a logistic function (i.e., Rasch model) of person and item parameters, and then are combined according to a mathematical model of processing on the composite item.

Key words

latent trait models information-processing models ability measurement 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Reference Notes

  1. Whitely, S. E. & Schneider, L.Process outcome models for verbal aptitude (Tech. Rep. No. NIE-80-1 for National Institute of Education grant NIE-6-7-0156). Lawrence, Kansas: Department of Psychology, University of Kansas, April, 1980.Google Scholar
  2. Frederiksen, J. R.A chronometric study of component skills in reading (NR 154–386 ONR Tech. Rep. 2). Cambridge, MA: Bolt, Beranek & Newman, 1978.Google Scholar


  1. Carroll, J. B. Psychometric tests as cognitive tasks: A new “structure of intellect”. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.),The nature of intelligence. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1976.Google Scholar
  2. Egan, D. E. Testing based on understanding: Implications from studies of spatial ability.Intelligence, 1979,3, 1–15.Google Scholar
  3. Fischer, G. H. The linear logistic test model as an instrument in educational research.Acta Psychologica, 1973,37, 359–374.Google Scholar
  4. Kempf, W. F. Dynamic models for the measurement of “traits” in social behavior. In W. E. Kempf & B. Repp (Eds.),Mathematical models for social psychology. Bern: Hans Huber Publishers, and New York: Wiley, 1977.Google Scholar
  5. Messick, S. Beyond structure: In search of functional models of psychological process.Psychometrika, 1972,37, 357–375.Google Scholar
  6. Pachella, R. G. The interpretation of reaction-time in information-processing research. In B. H. Kantowitz (Ed.),Human Information-Processing: Tutorials in Performance and Cognition. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1974.Google Scholar
  7. Pellegrino, J. W., & Glaser, R. Cognitive correlates and components in the analysis of individual differences.Intelligence, 1979.Google Scholar
  8. Samejima, F. Normal ogive model on the continuous response level in the multi-dimensional latent space.Psychometrika, 1974,39, 111–121.Google Scholar
  9. Scheiblechner, H. Das liernen und losen komplexer denkaufgaben.Z.f. exp.u. angew. Psychol., 1972,19, 476–505.Google Scholar
  10. Snow, R. E. Theory and research on aptitude processes.Intelligence, 1978,2, 225–278.Google Scholar
  11. Spada, H. Logistic models of learning and thought. In H. Spada & W. F. Kempf (Eds.),Structural models of thinking and learning. Bern, Switzerland: Hans Huber Publishers, 1977.Google Scholar
  12. Sternberg, R. J. Component processes in analogical reasoning.Psychological Review, 1977,34, No. 4, 356–378(a).Google Scholar
  13. Sternberg, R. J. The nature of mental abilities.American Psychologist, 1979,34, 214–230.Google Scholar
  14. Whitely, S. E. Latent trait models in the study of intelligence.Intelligence, 1980,4, 97–132.Google Scholar
  15. Whitely, S. E. Modeling aptitude test validity from cognitive components.Journal of Educational Psychology, in press.Google Scholar
  16. Whitely, S. E. Information-processing on intelligence test items. Some response components.Applied Psychological Measurement, 1978,1, 465–476.Google Scholar
  17. Whiteley, S. E., & Barnes, G. M. The implications of processing event sequences for theories of analogical reasoning.Memory & Cognition, 1979,1, 323–331.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Psychometric Society 1980

Authors and Affiliations

  • Susan E. Whitely
    • 1
  1. 1.Psychology DepartmentUniversity of KansasLawrence

Personalised recommendations