IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/cysrev/v35y2013i10p1780-1788.html

An item response theory investigation of the Family Assessment Form

Author

Listed:
  • Franke, Todd M.
  • Christie, Christina A.
  • Ho, Jennifer
  • Du, Lingyun

Abstract

Drawing from a sample obtained from a large scale, community-based child maltreatment prevention initiative, factor analysis and item response theory (IRT) were used to examine item discrimination and to identify items on the Family Assessment Form (FAF) that statistically do not add value for predictive modeling. Results suggest a consolidated, six-factor structure in general accordance with the current configuration of the instrument. In addition, 13 of the 59 items are identified as low information, indicating that they do not contribute unique measurement information regarding the underlying dimensions of the FAF. Findings suggest that from a statistical measurement perspective, the FAF can be shortened and retain its internal validity, although from a functional assessment perspective, certain items may need to be retained for comprehensive family assessment and case planning.

Suggested Citation

  • Franke, Todd M. & Christie, Christina A. & Ho, Jennifer & Du, Lingyun, 2013. "An item response theory investigation of the Family Assessment Form," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 1780-1788.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:cysrev:v:35:y:2013:i:10:p:1780-1788
    DOI: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2013.07.009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0190740913002430
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.childyouth.2013.07.009?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. R. Bock & Murray Aitkin, 1981. "Marginal maximum likelihood estimation of item parameters: Application of an EM algorithm," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 46(4), pages 443-459, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Simms, Steve & Benjamin, Jennifer & Franke, Todd & Patel, Pinky, 2025. "Modified family assessment form (MFAF) and Pennsylvania families: Establishing construct validity and reliability," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    2. Simon, James David & Brooks, Devon, 2016. "Post-investigation service need and utilization among families at risk of maltreatment," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 223-232.
    3. Simon, James David & Brooks, Devon, 2019. "Targeting services to reduce need after a child abuse investigation: Examining complex needs, matched services, and meaningful change," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 386-394.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sik-Yum Lee & Xin-Yuan Song, 2007. "A Unified Maximum Likelihood Approach for Analyzing Structural Equation Models With Missing Nonstandard Data," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 35(3), pages 352-381, February.
    2. Ying Cheng & Ke-Hai Yuan, 2010. "The Impact of Fallible Item Parameter Estimates on Latent Trait Recovery," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 75(2), pages 280-291, June.
    3. Wallin, Gabriel & Chen, Yunxiao & Lee, Yi-Hsuan & Li, Xiaoou, 2025. "A latent variable model with change-points and its application to time pressure effects in educational assessment," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 128070, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    4. Alberto Maydeu-Olivares & Rosa Montaño, 2013. "How Should We Assess the Fit of Rasch-Type Models? Approximating the Power of Goodness-of-Fit Statistics in Categorical Data Analysis," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 78(1), pages 116-133, January.
    5. Carolina Navarro & Luis Ayala & José Labeaga, 2010. "Housing deprivation and health status: evidence from Spain," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 38(3), pages 555-582, June.
    6. Ji Seung Yang & Xiaying Zheng, 2018. "Item Response Data Analysis Using Stata Item Response Theory Package," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 43(1), pages 116-129, February.
    7. Chen, Yunxiao & Li, Xiaoou, 2022. "Determining the number of factors in high-dimensional generalized latent factor models," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 111574, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    8. Alexander Robitzsch, 2024. "Bias-Reduced Haebara and Stocking–Lord Linking," J, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-12, September.
    9. Elisabeth R. Gerber & Jeffrey B. Lewis, 2004. "Beyond the Median: Voter Preferences, District Heterogeneity, and Political Representation," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 112(6), pages 1364-1383, December.
    10. Shiyu Wang & Georgios Fellouris & Hua-Hua Chang, 2019. "Statistical Foundations for Computerized Adaptive Testing with Response Revision," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 84(2), pages 375-394, June.
    11. Ting Lin, 2007. "Identifying Optimal Items in Quality of Life Assessment," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 41(5), pages 661-672, October.
    12. Singh, Jagdip, 2004. "Tackling measurement problems with Item Response Theory: Principles, characteristics, and assessment, with an illustrative example," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 184-208, February.
    13. Joel A. Martínez-Regalado & Cinthia Leonora Murillo-Avalos & Purificación Vicente-Galindo & Mónica Jiménez-Hernández & José Luis Vicente-Villardón, 2021. "Using HJ-Biplot and External Logistic Biplot as Machine Learning Methods for Corporate Social Responsibility Practices for Sustainable Development," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(20), pages 1-16, October.
    14. Klint Kanopka & Benjamin W. Domingue, 2025. "A Position-Sensitive Mixture Item Response Model," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 50(6), pages 1026-1059, December.
    15. Panagiota Sapouna & Dimitris Manolopoulos & Pavlos Dimitratos, 2016. "How do MNC R&D Laboratory Roles Affect Employee International Assignments?," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 56(5), pages 759-779, October.
    16. repec:jss:jstsof:28:i10 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Werner Wothke & George Burket & Li-Sue Chen & Furong Gao & Lianghua Shu & Mike Chia, 2011. "Multimodal Likelihoods in Educational Assessment," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 36(6), pages 736-754, December.
    18. Ernesto San Martín & Jean-Marie Rolin & Luis Castro, 2013. "Identification of the 1PL Model with Guessing Parameter: Parametric and Semi-parametric Results," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 78(2), pages 341-379, April.
    19. Carrie R. Houts & Melissa A. Z. Knoll, 2020. "The Financial Knowledge Scale: New Analyses, Findings, and Development of a Short Form," Journal of Consumer Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(2), pages 775-800, June.
    20. Chenchen Ma & Jing Ouyang & Chun Wang & Gongjun Xu, 2024. "A Note on Improving Variational Estimation for Multidimensional Item Response Theory," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 89(1), pages 172-204, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:cysrev:v:35:y:2013:i:10:p:1780-1788. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/childyouth .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.