Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel
Confirmatory factor analysis fit criteria typically are used to evaluate the unidimensionality of item banks. This study explored the degree to which the values of these statistics are affected by two characteristics of item banks developed to measure health outcomes: large numbers of items and nonnormal data.
Analyses were conducted on simulated and observed data. Observed data were responses to the Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Pain Impact Item Bank. Simulated data fit the graded response model and conformed to a normal distribution or mirrored the distribution of the observed data. Confirmatory factor analyses (CFA), parallel analysis, and bifactor analysis were conducted.
CFA fit values were found to be sensitive to data distribution and number of items. In some instances impact of distribution and item number was quite large.
We concluded that using traditional cutoffs and standards for CFA fit statistics is not recommended for establishing unidimensionality of item banks. An investigative approach is favored over reliance on published criteria. We found bifactor analysis to be appealing in this regard because it allows evaluation of the relative impact of secondary dimensions. In addition to these methodological conclusions, we judged the items of the PROMIS Pain Impact bank to be sufficiently unidimensional for item response theory (IRT) modeling.
Log in om toegang te krijgen
Met onderstaand(e) abonnement(en) heeft u direct toegang:
Embretson, S. E., & Reise, S. P. (2000). Item response theory for psychologists. Mahway, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Hambleton, R., Swaminathan, H., & Rogers, H. J. (1991). Fundamentals of item response theory. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publishing, Inc.
Wainer, H. (1990). Computerized adaptive testing: A primer. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
McDonald, R. (1981). The dimensionality of test and items. The British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 34, 100–117.
Cella, D., Yount, S., Rothrock, N., Gershon, R., Cook, K., Reeve, B., et al. (2007). The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS): Progress of an NIH Roadmap cooperative group during its first two years. Medical Care, 45, S3–S11. doi: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000258615.42478.55. PubMedCrossRef
Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York: The Guilford Press.
Gorsuch, R. L. (1983). Factor analysis (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136–172). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1995). Evaluating model fit. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues and applications (pp. 76–79). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indices in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55. CrossRef
Muthen, B. O., & Muthen, L. K. (2001). Mplus user’s guide. Los Angeles, CA: Muthen & Muthen.
Yu, C. Y. (2002). Evaluating cutoff criteria of model fit indices for latent variable models with binary and continuous outcomes. Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles.
Joreskog, K. G., & Sorbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIS command language. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International, Inc.
Bentler, P. M. (1995). EQS structural equations program manual. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software.
Browne, M. W. (1984). Asymptotically distribution-free methods for the analysis of covariance structures. The British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 37, 62–83. PubMed
Reeve, B. B., Hays, R. D., Bjorner, J. B., Cook, K. F., Crane, P. K., Teresi, J. A., et al. (2007). Psychometric evaluation and calibration of health-related quality of life item banks: Plans for the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS). Medical Care, 45, S22–S31. doi: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000250483.85507.04. PubMedCrossRef
McDonald, R. P. (1999). Test theory: A unified treatment. Mahway, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum.
Kline, R. B. (1998). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
West, S. G., Finch, J. F., & Curran, P. J. (1995). SEM with nonnormal variables. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Joreskog, K. G. (2005). Structural equation modeling with ordinal variables using LISREL. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International, Inc.
O’Connor, B. P. (2000). SPSS and SAS programs for determining the number of components using parallel analysis and Velicer’s MAP test. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 32, 396–402.
Reeve, B. B., Burke, L. B., Chiang, Y. P., Clauser, S. B., Colpe, L. J., Elias, J. W., et al. (2007). Enhancing measurement in health outcomes research supported by Agencies within the US Department of Health and Human Services. Quality of Life Research, 16(Suppl 1), 175–186. doi: 10.1007/s11136-007-9190-8. PubMedCrossRef
Thissen, D., Chen, W.-H., & Bock, R. D. (2003). Multilog (version 7). Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International.
Samejima, F. (1969). Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores. Psychometrika Monograph Supplement No. 17.
Bjorner, J. B., Smith, K. J., Stone, C., & Sun, X. (2007). IRTFIT: A macro for item fit and local dependence tests under IRT models. Lincoln, RI: QualityMetric.
Han, K. T., & Hambleton, R. K. (2007). User’s manual: WinGen (Center for Educational Assessment Report No. 642). Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts, School of Education.
Choi, S. W. (2008). Firestar: Computerized adaptive testing (CAT) simulation program for polytomous IRT models. Applied Psychological Measurement (in press).
- Having a fit: impact of number of items and distribution of data on traditional criteria for assessing IRT’s unidimensionality assumption
Karon F. Cook
Michael A. Kallen
- Springer Netherlands