Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Psychometric latent response models

  • Published:
Psychometrika Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper, some psychometric models will be presented that belong to the larger class oflatent response models (LRMs). First, LRMs are introduced by means of an application in the field ofcomponential item response theory (Embretson, 1980, 1984). Second, a general definition of LRMs (not specific for the psychometric subclass) is given. Third, some more psychometric LRMs, and examples of how they can be applied, are presented. Fourth, a method for obtaining maximum likelihood (ML) and some maximum a posteriori (MAP) estimates of the parameters of LRMs is presented. This method is then applied to theconjunctive Rasch model. Fifth and last, an application of the conjunctive Rasch model is presented. This model was applied to responses to typical verbal ability items (open synonym items).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Albert, A., & Anderson, J. A. (1984). On the existence of maximum likelihood estimates in logistic regression models.Biometrika, 71, 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bock, R. D., & Aitkin, M. (1981). Marginal maximum likelihood estimation of item parameters: Application of an EM-algorithm.Psychometrika, 46, 443–459.

    Google Scholar 

  • Billingsley, P. (1986).Probability and measure. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter, P. A., & Just, M. A. (1986). Spatial ability: An information processing approach to psychometrics. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Advances in the psychology of human intelligence (Vol. 3, pp. 221–253). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Boeck, P. (1988).A psychometric study of cognitive components in verbal intelligence tasks (Research proposal OT-89-9). Leuven: University of Leuven, Research Group on Quantitative Methods.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dempster, A. P., Laird, N. M., & Rubin, D. B. (1977). Maximum likelihood estimation from incomplete data via the EM Algorithm (with discussion).Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 39, 1–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Embretson, S. (1980). Multicomponent latent trait models for ability tests.Psychometrika, 45, 479–494.

    Google Scholar 

  • Embretson, S. (1984). A general latent trait model for response processes.Psychometrika, 49, 175–186.

    Google Scholar 

  • Embretson, S. (in press). Working memory versus general control processes in intelligence.Intelligence.

  • Fischer, G. H. (1974).Einfuhrung in die Theorie psychologischer Tests [Introduction to the theory of psychological tests]. Bern: Huber.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, G. H. (1981). On the existence and uniqueness of maximum likelihood estimates in the Rasch model.Psychometrika, 46, 59–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gill, P. E., Murray, W., & Wright, M. H. (1981).Practical optimization. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glas, C. A. W. (1988). The derivation of some tests for the Rasch model from the multinomial distribution.Psychometrika, 53, 525–546.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glas, C. A. W. (1990).Rasch incomplete design analysis [Computer program]. Arnhem, The Netherlands: National Institute for Educational Measurement (CITO).

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldman, S. R., & Pellegrino, J. W. (1984). Deductions about induction: Analyses of developmental and individual differences. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.),Advances in the psychology of human intelligence (Vol. 2, pp. 149–198). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jannarone, R. J., Yu, K. F., & Laughlin, J. E. (1990). Easy Bayes estimates for Rasch-type models.Psychometrika, 55, 449–460.

    Google Scholar 

  • Janssen, R., Hoskens, M., & De Boeck, P. (1993). An application of Embretson's multicomponent latent trait model to synonym tests. In R. Steyer, K. F. Wender, & K. F. Widaman (Eds.),Proceedings of the 7th European Meeting of the Psychometric Society (pp. 187–190). Stuttgart and New York: Gustav Fischer Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kiefer, J., & Wolfowitz, J. (1956). Consistency of the maximum likelihood estimator in the presence of infinitely many incidental parameters.Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 27, 887–903.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luce, R. D. (1986).Response times: Their role in inferring elementary mental organization. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maris, E. (1992).Psychometric models for psychological processes and structures. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Leuven, Belgium.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E., Larkin, J. H., & Kadane, J. B. (1984). A cognitive analysis of mathematical problem-solving ability. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.),Advances in the psychology of human intelligence (Vol. 2, pp. 231–273). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • McClelland, J. L., & Rumelhart, D. E. (1981). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: Part 1. An account of basic findings.Psychological Review, 88, 375–407.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mood, A. M., Graybill, F. A., & Boes, D. C. (1974).Introduction to the theory of statistics. London: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muthén, B. (1978). Contributions to factor analysis of dichotomized variables.Psychometrika, 43, 551–560.

    Google Scholar 

  • Novick, M. R., & Jackson, P. H. (1974).Statistical methods for educational and psychological research. New York: Mc-Graw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pellegrino, J. W., & Kail, R. (1982). Process analysis of spatial aptitude. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.),Advances in the psychology of human intelligence (Vol. 1, pp. 311–366). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rasch, G. (1980).Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, D. B., Thayer, D. T. (1982). EM algorithms for factor analysis.Psychometrika, 47, 69–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, R. J. (1977).Intelligence, information processing, and analogical reasoning: The componential analysis of human abilities. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thurstone, L. L. (1927). A law of comparative judgment.Psychological Review, 34, 273–286.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verhelst, N. D., & Verstralen, H. H. F. M. (1993). A stochastic unfolding model derived from the partial credit model.Kwantitatieve Methoden, 42, 73–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu, C. F. J. (1983). On the convergence properties of the EM-algorithm.The Annals of Statistics, 11, 95–103.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Nijmegen Institute for Cognition and Information (NICI), Department of Mathematical Psychology, University of Nijmegen, PO Box 9104, 6500 HE, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

    Eric Maris

Authors
  1. Eric Maris
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eric Maris.

Additional information

This paper presents theoretical and empirical results of a research project supported by the Research Council [Onderzoeksraad] of the University of Leuven (grant number 89-9) to Paul De Boeck and Luc Delbeke.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Maris, E. Psychometric latent response models. Psychometrika 60, 523–547 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02294327

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02294327

Key words

Search

Navigation