Abstract
The aim of this paper is to discuss nonparametric item response theory scores in terms of optimal scores as an alternative to parametric item response theory scores and sum scores. Optimal scores take advantage of the interaction between performance and item impact that is evident in most testing data. The theoretical arguments in favor of optimal scoring are supplemented with the results from simulation experiments, and the analysis of test data suggests that sum-scored tests would need to be longer than an optimally scored test in order to attain the same level of accuracy. Because optimal scoring is built on a nonparametric procedure, it also offers a flexible alternative for estimating item characteristic curves that can fit items that do not show good fit to item response theory models.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Birnbaum, A. (1968). Some latent trait models and their use in inferring an examinee’s ability. In F. M. Lord & M. R. Novick (Eds.), Statistical theories of mental tests (pp. 395–479). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Lee, Y.-S. (2007). A comparison of methods for nonparametric estimation of item characteristic curves for binary items. Applied Psychological Measurement, 37, 121–134.
Lord, F. M. (1980). Applications of item response theory to practical testing problems. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Mokken, R. J. (1997). Nonparametric models for dichotomous responses. In W. J. van der Linden & R. K. Hambleton (Eds.), Handbook of modern item response theory (pp. 351–367). New York: Springer.
Ramsay, J. O. (1991). Kernel smoothing approaches to nonparametric item characteristic curve estimation. Psychometrika, 56, 611–630.
Ramsay, J. O. (1997). A functional approach to modeling test data. In W. J. van der Linden & R. K. Hambleton (Eds.), Handbook of modern item response theory (pp. 351–367). New York: Springer.
Ramsay, J. O. (2000). TestGraf: A program for the graphical analysis of multiple choice test and questionnaire data [Computer software and manual]. Montreal: Department of Psychology, McGill University.
Ramsay, J. O., Hooker, G., & Graves, S. (2009). Functional data analysis in R and Matlab. New York: Springer.
Ramsay, J. O., & Silverman, B. W. (2002). Functional models for test items. In J. O. Ramsay & B. W. Silverman Applied functional data analysis. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Ramsay, J. O., & Silverman, B. W. (2005). Functional data analysis. New York: Springer.
Ramsay, J. O., & Wiberg, M. (2017a). A strategy for replacing sum scores. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 42(3), 282–307.
Ramsay, J. O., & Wiberg, M. (2017b). Breaking through the sum scoring barrier. In L. A. van der Ark, M. Wiberg, S. A. Culpepper, J. A. Douglas, & W.-C. Wang (Eds.), Quantitative psychology—81st annual meeting of the psychometric society, Asheville, North Carolina, 2016 (pp. 151–158). New York: Springer.
Rossi, N., Wang, X., & Ramsay, J. O. (2002). Nonparametric item response function estimates with the EM algorithm. Journal of the Behavioral and Educational Sciences, 27, 291–317.
Wiberg, M., & Bränberg, K. (2015). Kernel equating under the non-equivalent groups with covariates design. Applied Psychological Measurement, 39(5), 349–361.
Woods, C. M. (2006). Ramsay-curve item response theory (RC-IRT) to detect and correct for nonnormal latent variables. Psychological Methods, 11, 253–270.
Woods, C. M., & Thissen, D. (2006). Item response theory with estimation of the latent population distribution using spline-based densities. Psychometrika, 71, 281–301.
Acknowledgements
This research was funded by the Swedish Research Council Grant 2014-578.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Wiberg, M., Ramsay, J.O. & Li, J. Optimal Scores: An Alternative to Parametric Item Response Theory and Sum Scores. Psychometrika 84, 310–322 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-018-9639-4
Received:
Revised:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-018-9639-4