Abstract
The issue of compensation in multidimensional response modeling is addressed. We show that multidimensional response models are compensatory in their ability parameters if and only if they are monotone. In addition, a minimal set of assumptions is presented under which the MLEs of the ability parameters are also compensatory. In a recent series of articles, beginning with Hooker, Finkelman, and Schwartzman (2009) in this journal, the second type of compensation was presented as a paradoxical result for certain multidimensional response models, leading to occasional unfairness in maximum-likelihood test scoring. First, it is indicated that the compensation is not unique and holds generally for any multiparameter likelihood with monotone score functions. Second, we analyze why, in spite of its generality, the compensation may give the impression of a paradox or unfairness.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Andrich, D., & Luo, G. (1993). A hyperbolic cosine latent trait model for unfolding dichotomous single-stimulus responses. Applied Psychological Measurement, 17, 253–276.
Finkelman, M., Hooker, G., & Wang, Z. (2010). Prevalence and magnitude of paradoxical results in multidimensional item response theory. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 35, 744–761.
Hoijtink, H. (1990). A latent trait model for dichotomous choice data. Psychometrika, 55, 641–656.
Hooker, G. (2010). On separable test, correlated priors, and paradoxical results in multidimensional item response theory. Psychometrika, 75, 694–707.
Hooker, G., & Finkelman, M. (2010). Paradoxical results and item bundles. Psychometrika, 75, 249–271.
Hooker, G., Finkelman, M., & Schwartzman, A. (2009). Paradoxical results in multidimensional item response theory. Psychometrika, 74, 419–442.
McDonald, R.P. (1997). Normal-ogive multidimensional model. In W.J. van der Linden & R.K. Hambleton (Eds.), Handbook of modern item response theory (pp. 258–286). New York: Springer.
Rasch, G. (1960). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Reckase, M.D. (2009). Multidimensional item response theory. New York: Springer.
Roberts, J.S., & Laughlin, J.E. (1996). A unidimensional item response model for unfolding responses from a graded disagree-agree response scale. Applied Psychological Measurement, 20, 231–255.
Sympson, J.B. (1978). A model for testing with multiple choice items. In D.J. Weiss (Ed.), Proceedings of the 1977 computerized adaptive testing conference (pp. 82–98). Minneapolis: Department of Psychology, University of Minnesota.
van der Linden, W.J. (1998). Stochastic order in dichotomous item response models for fixed, adaptive, and multidimensional tests. Psychometrika, 63, 211–226.
van der Linden, W.J. (2005). Linear models for optimal test design. New York: Springer.
van der Linden, W.J., & Vos, J.H. (1996). A compensatory approach to optimal selection with mastery scores. Psychometrika, 61, 155–172.
Verhelst, N.D., & Verstralen, H.H.F.M. (1993). A stochastic unfolding model derived from the partial credit model. Kwantitatieve Methoden, 42, 73–92.
Whitely, S. (1980). Multicomponent latent trait models for ability tests. Psychometrika, 45, 479–494.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
van der Linden, W.J. On Compensation in Multidimensional Response Modeling. Psychometrika 77, 21–30 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-011-9237-1
Received:
Revised:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-011-9237-1