IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/psycho/v82y2017i3d10.1007_s11336-016-9544-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Modeling Omitted and Not-Reached Items in IRT Models

Author

Listed:
  • Norman Rose

    (University of Tübingen)

  • Matthias Davier

    (Educational Testing Service)

  • Benjamin Nagengast

    (University of Tübingen)

Abstract

Item nonresponse is a common problem in educational and psychological assessments. The probability of unplanned missing responses due to omitted and not-reached items may stochastically depend on unobserved variables such as missing responses or latent variables. In such cases, missingness cannot be ignored and needs to be considered in the model. Specifically, multidimensional IRT models, latent regression models, and multiple-group IRT models have been suggested for handling nonignorable missing responses in latent trait models. However, the suitability of the particular models with respect to omitted and not-reached items has rarely been addressed. Missingness is formalized by response indicators that are modeled jointly with the researcher’s target model. We will demonstrate that response indicators have different statistical properties depending on whether the items were omitted or not reached. The implications of these differences are used to derive a joint model for nonignorable missing responses with ability to appropriately account for both omitted and not-reached items. The performance of the model is demonstrated by means of a small simulation study.

Suggested Citation

  • Norman Rose & Matthias Davier & Benjamin Nagengast, 2017. "Modeling Omitted and Not-Reached Items in IRT Models," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 82(3), pages 795-819, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:psycho:v:82:y:2017:i:3:d:10.1007_s11336-016-9544-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s11336-016-9544-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11336-016-9544-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11336-016-9544-7?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 search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James J. Heckman, 1976. "The Common Structure of Statistical Models of Truncation, Sample Selection and Limited Dependent Variables and a Simple Estimator for Such Models," NBER Chapters, in: Annals of Economic and Social Measurement, Volume 5, number 4, pages 475-492, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Frederic Lord, 1974. "Estimation of latent ability and item parameters when there are omitted responses," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 39(2), pages 247-264, June.
    3. Yaowen Hsu, 2000. "On the Bock-Aitkin procedure—From an EM algorithm perspective," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 65(4), pages 547-549, December.
    4. 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.
    5. Mark Huisman, 2000. "Imputation of Missing Item Responses: Some Simple Techniques," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 34(4), pages 331-351, November.
    6. Matthias von Davier & Sandip Sinharay, 2010. "Stochastic Approximation Methods for Latent Regression Item Response Models," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 35(2), pages 174-193, April.
    7. Heckman, James, 2013. "Sample selection bias as a specification error," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
    8. Michael R. Harwell & Frank B. Baker & Michael Zwarts, 1988. "Item Parameter Estimation Via Marginal Maximum Likelihood and an EM Algorithm: A Didactic," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 13(3), pages 243-271, September.
    9. Irini Moustaki & Martin Knott, 2000. "Weighting for item non‐response in attitude scales by using latent variable models with covariates," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 163(3), pages 445-459.
    10. C. O'Muircheartaigh & I. Moustaki, 1999. "Symmetric pattern models: a latent variable approach to item non‐response in attitude scales," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 162(2), pages 177-194.
    11. Paul Boeck, 2008. "Random Item IRT Models," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 73(4), pages 533-559, December.
    12. Stephen Schilling & R. Bock, 2005. "High-dimensional maximum marginal likelihood item factor analysis by adaptive quadrature," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 70(3), pages 533-555, September.
    13. Robert Mislevy, 1984. "Estimating latent distributions," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 49(3), pages 359-381, September.
    14. Frederic Lord, 1983. "Maximum likelihood estimation of item response parameters when some responses are omitted," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 48(3), pages 477-482, September.
    15. Raymond J. Adams & Mark Wilson & Margaret Wu, 1997. "Multilevel Item Response Models: An Approach to Errors in Variables Regression," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 22(1), pages 47-76, March.
    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. Jinxin Guo & Xin Xu & Zhiliang Ying & Susu Zhang, 2022. "Modeling Not-Reached Items in Timed Tests: A Response Time Censoring Approach," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 87(3), pages 835-867, September.
    2. Matthias von Davier & Youngmi Cho & Tianshu Pan, 2019. "Effects of Discontinue Rules on Psychometric Properties of Test Scores," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 84(1), pages 147-163, March.
    3. Susu Zhang & Zhi Wang & Jitong Qi & Jingchen Liu & Zhiliang Ying, 2023. "Accurate Assessment via Process Data," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 88(1), pages 76-97, March.
    4. Sandip Sinharay, 2022. "Reporting Proficiency Levels for Examinees With Incomplete Data," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 47(3), pages 263-296, June.
    5. Simon Grund & Oliver Lüdtke & Alexander Robitzsch, 2021. "On the Treatment of Missing Data in Background Questionnaires in Educational Large-Scale Assessments: An Evaluation of Different Procedures," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 46(4), pages 430-465, August.
    6. Robitzsch, Alexander, 2020. "About Still Nonignorable Consequences of (Partially) Ignoring Missing Item Responses in Large-scale Assessment," OSF Preprints hmy45, Center for Open Science.

    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. Jiwei Zhang & Zhaoyuan Zhang & Jian Tao, 2021. "A Bayesian algorithm based on auxiliary variables for estimating GRM with non-ignorable missing data," Computational Statistics, Springer, vol. 36(4), pages 2643-2669, December.
    2. Jouni Kuha & Myrsini Katsikatsou & Irini Moustaki, 2018. "Latent variable modelling with non‐ignorable item non‐response: multigroup response propensity models for cross‐national analysis," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 181(4), pages 1169-1192, October.
    3. Simon Grund & Oliver Lüdtke & Alexander Robitzsch, 2021. "On the Treatment of Missing Data in Background Questionnaires in Educational Large-Scale Assessments: An Evaluation of Different Procedures," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 46(4), pages 430-465, August.
    4. Ping Chen & Chun Wang, 2021. "Using EM Algorithm for Finite Mixtures and Reformed Supplemented EM for MIRT Calibration," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 86(1), pages 299-326, March.
    5. Steffi Pohl & Esther Ulitzsch & Matthias Davier, 2019. "Using Response Times to Model Not-Reached Items due to Time Limits," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 84(3), pages 892-920, September.
    6. Hans A. Holter & Dirk Krueger & Serhiy Stepanchuk, 2019. "How do tax progressivity and household heterogeneity affect Laffer curves?," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 10(4), pages 1317-1356, November.
    7. Renuka Sane & Susan Thomas, 2020. "From Participation To Repurchase: Low Income Households And Micro‐insurance," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 87(3), pages 783-814, September.
    8. Michael Ziegelmeyer & Julius Nick, 2013. "Backing out of private pension provision: lessons from Germany," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 40(3), pages 505-539, August.
    9. Yuen Leng Chow & Isa E. Hafalir & Abdullah Yavas, 2015. "Auction versus Negotiated Sale: Evidence from Real Estate Sales," Real Estate Economics, American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association, vol. 43(2), pages 432-470, June.
    10. Xavier Ramos Morilla & Josep Lluís Raymond Bara & Josep Oliver Alonso, 1999. "Not All University Degrees Yield the Same Return: Private and Social Returns to Higher Education for Males in Spain," Working Papers wpdea9904, Department of Applied Economics at Universitat Autonoma of Barcelona.
    11. P.W. Miller & S. Rummery, 1989. "Gender Wage Discrimination in Australia: A reassessment," Economics Discussion / Working Papers 89-21, The University of Western Australia, Department of Economics.
    12. Giovanna Culot & Matteo Podrecca & Guido Nassimbeni & Guido Orzes & Marco Sartor, 2023. "Using supply chain databases in academic research: A methodological critique," Journal of Supply Chain Management, Institute for Supply Management, vol. 59(1), pages 3-25, January.
    13. John Simon & Tahlee Stone, 2017. "The Property Ladder after the Financial Crisis: The First Step is a Stretch but Those Who Make It Are Doing OK," RBA Research Discussion Papers rdp2017-05, Reserve Bank of Australia.
    14. Verbeek, M.J.C.M. & Nijman, T.E., 1992. "Incomplete panels and selection bias : A survey," Discussion Paper 1992-7, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    15. Khim-Yong Goh & Cheng-Suang Heng & Zhijie Lin, 2013. "Social Media Brand Community and Consumer Behavior: Quantifying the Relative Impact of User- and Marketer-Generated Content," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 24(1), pages 88-107, March.
    16. Alireza Rezaee & Mojtaba Ganjali & Ehsan Bahrami Samani, 2022. "Sample selection bias with multiple dependent selection rules: an application to survey data analysis with multilevel nonresponse," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics, Springer;Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics, vol. 158(1), pages 1-15, December.
    17. Aldashev, Alisher & Gernandt, Johannes & Thomsen, Stephan L., 2009. "Language usage, participation, employment and earnings: Evidence for foreigners in West Germany with multiple sources of selection," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(3), pages 330-341, June.
    18. Arndt Reichert & Harald Tauchmann, 2014. "When outcome heterogeneously matters for selection: a generalized selection correction estimator," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(7), pages 762-768, March.
    19. Eric Rasmusen, 1995. "Observed Choice, Estimation, and Optimism About Policy Changes," Econometrics 9506004, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 16 Jun 1995.
    20. Rama Lionel Ngenzebuke, 2016. "Female say on income and child outcomes: Evidence from Nigeria," WIDER Working Paper Series 134, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).

    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:spr:psycho:v:82:y:2017:i:3:d:10.1007_s11336-016-9544-7. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.