Skip to main content
Log in

Metric Transformations and the Filtered Monotonic Polynomial Item Response Model

  • Published:
Psychometrika Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The \(\theta \) metric in item response theory is often not the most useful metric for score reporting or interpretation. In this paper, I demonstrate that the filtered monotonic polynomial (FMP) item response model, a recently proposed nonparametric item response model (Liang & Browne in J Educ Behav Stat 40:5–34, 2015), can be used to specify item response models on metrics other than the \(\theta \) metric. Specifically, I demonstrate that any item response function (IRF) defined within the FMP framework can be re-expressed as another FMP IRF by taking monotonic transformations of the latent trait. I derive the item parameter transformations that correspond to both linear and nonlinear transformations of the latent trait metric. These item parameter transformations can be used to define an item response model based on any monotonic transformation of the \(\theta \) metric, so long as the metric transformation is approximated by a monotonic polynomial. I demonstrate this result by defining an item response model directly on the approximate true score metric and discuss the implications of metric transformations for applied testing situations.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Because \(h^{-1}\) is a strictly monotonic function, it is guaranteed to have an inverse, and thus the function h is also strictly monotonic and invertible. The inverse transformation, \(h^{-1}\), is used in the current definition for notational consistency.

  2. When operating within the Rasch tradition of item response theory, the scaling of the latent variable is typically not considered arbitrary due to the existence of sufficient statistics and the model’s close connection to additive conjoint measurement (Perline, Wright, & Wainer, 1979). These features are not shared by other item response models. From these facts, it has been argued that the latent trait under Rasch modeling is on an interval-level metric. A discussion of the merits and limitations of this line of reasoning is beyond the scope of this paper, but the interested reader may consult Kyngdon (2008) and the replies to his article that were published in the same journal issue.

  3. Ramsay and Wiberg (2017) approach the problem of specifying an item response model on a sum score-like metric using nonparametric item calibration. In the example given in this paper, I assume that an item response model has already been fitted. The merits of Ramsay and Wiberg’s method notwithstanding, my example is intended to illustrate a general method that can be used to transform already fitted models to any metric that is monotonically related to \(\theta \). Although beyond the scope of this paper, I believe that the methods described in this paper could be adapted to allow for linking among different calibrations specified under Ramsay and Wiberg’s method.

References

  • Akaike, H. (1973). Information theory and an extension of the maximum likelihood principle. In B. N. Petrox & F. Caski (Eds.), Second international symposium on information theory (pp. 267–281). Budapest: Akademiai Kiado.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bock, R. D., Thissen, D., & Zimowski, M. F. (1997). IRT estimation of domain scores. Journal of Educational Measurement, 34, 197–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butcher, J. N., Williams, C. L., Graham, J. R., Archer, R. P., Tellegen, A., Ben-Porath, Y. S., et al. (1992). MMPI-A (Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-Adolescent): Manual for administration, scoring, and interpretation. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elphinstone, C. D. (1983). A target distribution model for nonparametric density estimation. Communication in Statistics-Theory and Methods, 12, 161–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elphinstone, C. D. (1985). A method of distribution and density estimation (Unpublished dissertation). Pretoria: University of South Africa.

    Google Scholar 

  • Embretson, S. E. (1996). The new rules of measurement. Psychological Assessment, 8, 341–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Falk, C. F., & Cai, L. (2016a). Maximum marginal likelihood estimation of a monotonic polynomial generalized partial credit model with applications to multiple group analysis. Psychometrika, 81, 434–460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Falk, C. F., & Cai, L. (2016b). Semiparametric item response functions in the context of guessing. Journal of Educational Measurement, 53, 229247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feuerstahler, L. M. (2018). flexmet: Flexible latent trait metrics using the filtered monotonic polynomial item response model. R package version 1.0.0.0

  • Haebara, T. (1980). Equating logistic ability scales by a weighted least squares method. Japanese Psychological Research, 22, 144–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hawkins, D. M. (1994). Fitting monotonic polynomials to data. Computational Statistics, 9, 233–247.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolen, M. J. (1988). Defining score scales in relation to measurement error. Journal of Educational Measurement, 25, 97–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolen, M. J., & Brennan, R. L. (2014). Test equating, scaling, and linking (3rd ed.). New York: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kyngdon, A. (2008). The Rasch model from the perspective of the representational theory of measurement. Theory & Psychology, 18, 89–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liang, L. (2007). A semi-parametric approach to estimating item response functions (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liang, L., & Browne, M. W. (2015). A quasi-parametric method for fitting flexible item response functions. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 40, 5–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lord, F. M. (1974). The relative efficiency of two tests as a function of ability level. Psychometrika, 39, 351–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lord, F. M. (1975). The ‘ability’ scale in item characteristic curve theory. Psychometrika, 40, 205–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lord, F. M. (1980). Applications of item response theory to practical testing problems. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mokken, R. J. (1971). A theory and procedure of scale analysis with applications in political research. The Hague: Mouton.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Murray, K., Müller, S., & Turlach, B. A. (2013). Revisiting fitting monotone polynomials to data. Computational Statistics, 28, 1989–2005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murray, K., Müller, S., & Turlach, B. A. (2016). Fast and flexible methods for monotone polynomial fitting. Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation, 86, 2946–2966.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perline, R., Wright, B. D., & Wainer, H. (1979). The Rasch model as additive conjoint measurement. Applied Psychological Measurement, 3, 237–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramsay, J. O. (1991). Kernel smoothing approaches to nonparametric item characteristic curve estimation. Psychometrika, 56, 611–630.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramsay, J. O., & Wiberg, M. (2017). A strategy for replacing sum scoring. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 42, 282–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramsay, J. O., & Winsberg, S. (1991). Maximum marginal likelihood estimation for semiparametric item analysis. Psychometrika, 56, 365–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • R Core Team. (2017). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. Retrieved from https://www.R-project.org.

  • Reise, S. P., & Waller, N. G. (2003). How many IRT parameters does it take to model psychopathology items? Psychological Methods, 8, 164–184.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schulz, E. M., & Nicewander, W. A. (1997). Grade equivalent and IRT representations of growth. Journal of Educational Measurement, 34, 315–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stevens, S. S. (1946). On the theory of scales of measurement. Science, 103, 677–680.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stocking, M. L. (1996). An alternative method for scoring adaptive tests. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 21, 365–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stocking, M. L., & Lord, F. M. (1983). Developing a common metric in item response theory. Applied Psychological Measurement, 7, 201–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tadikamalla, P. R. (1980). On simulating non-normal distributions. Psychometrika, 45, 273–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turlach, B., & Murray, K. (2016). MonoPoly: Functions to fit monotone polynomials. R package version 0.3-8.

  • van der Linden, W. J., & Barrett, M. D. (2016). Linking item response model parameters. Psychometrika, 81, 650–673.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Weiss, D. J. (1982). Improving measurement quality and efficiency with adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 6, 473–492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yi, Q., Wang, T., & Ban, J.-C. (2001). Effects of scale transformation and test-termination rule on the precision of ability estimation in computerized adaptive testing. Journal of Educational Measurement, 38, 267–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zwick, R. (1992). Statistical and psychometric issues in the measurement of educational achievement trends: Examples from the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Journal of Educational Statistics, 17, 205–218.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Leah M. Feuerstahler.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (pdf 171 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Feuerstahler, L.M. Metric Transformations and the Filtered Monotonic Polynomial Item Response Model. Psychometrika 84, 105–123 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-018-9642-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-018-9642-9

Keywords

Navigation