期刊文献+

哪个测验Q矩阵更合理:基于DINA模型测验Q矩阵合理性侦查指标及其比较与应用 被引量:3

The development of the indexes to identify the rationality of test Q matrices based on DINA model
下载PDF
导出
摘要 本研究对多个测验Q矩阵的相对合理性的比较与选用开展研究,采用Monte Carlo模拟与实证研究相结合的范式,探讨R_square、HCI、-2LL、AIC、BIC、residual、ABS_residual及本研究新开发的BIC2等八项指标在测验Q矩阵合理性侦查效果及其比较。研究发现:八项指标中,除BIC和BIC2两项指标的对测验Q矩阵相对合理性的平均正确识别率在95%以上,其余指标的平均正确识别率不足90%,整体而言,考虑样本容量及参数个数双重加权的BIC和BIC2两项指标的表现总体上优于其它几项指标;各项指标在不同Q矩阵错误类型下其正确识别率也不尽相同。 The purpose of cognitive diagnosis (CD) is to detect the internal psychological rules and the human processing mechanism. Since a cognitive diagnosis assessment would report the features about individuals, such as his/her current cognitive status, the cognitive procedure, and the processing skills and knowledge structures etc., it would help teachers and students learn a lot about an individual, and choose a more effective way to teach or learn. In short, CD would play an important role on an individual's development. More and more attention should be paid to the cognitive diagnosis assessment. With more and more applications of CD in practice, researchers and practitioners found out that the task to identify a test Q matrix was very hard. Even if a test Q matrix was established, it would also be difficult to evaluate its correctness. Virtually, there might be several possible test Q matrices provided by the experts at the same time. Practitioners are always confused about which might be the right. Corresponding to this phenomenon, they need to find a method to determine which one is the most appropriate one. This study attempted to propose some indexes which might be used for the selection of a test Q matrix. In order to verify the effectiveness of the indexes, a comparison study was done. It aimed to find out the advantages and disadvantages of each index, and to get an idea of which indexes might be used to choose Q matrices. All these kinds of information could be very useful for the applicants. In this study, some test Q matrices with different degrees of correctness were provided, and the DINA model was applied. Both the Monte Carlo simulation method and the real data analysis were used; all the results were indicated as follows: Firstly, according to these eight indexes, the average correct identification rate (ACIR) of the BIC and BIC2 was greater than 95 percent. The ACIRs of the other indexes were less than 90 percent; some indexes were even less than 50 percent. Secondly, the ACIRs varied according to different categories of incorrect Q matrices. Considered with the E error type, the ACIRs of these indexes were relatively low, most of them were less than 50 percent, except the BIC2 index. Thirdly, weighted by both the size of samples and the number of parameters, the performances of BIC and BIC2 were better than those of the rest. From the above results, it is showed that the BIC and BIC2 might be the best indexes for the selection of test Q matrix when multiple test Q matrices were proposed.
出处 《心理科学》 CSSCI CSCD 北大核心 2015年第5期1239-1247,共9页 Journal of Psychological Science
基金 国家自然科学基金(31100756 31300876 31160203 31360237) 教育部人文社科项目(11YJC190002) 高等院校博士点基金项目(20103604120001 20123604120001) 江西省社会科学规划项目重点项目(13JY01) 江西省教育科学规划项目(12YB088 13YB029) 江西师范大学青年英才培育资助计划等课题的资助
关键词 认知诊断 测验Q矩阵 正确识别率 DINA模型 cognitive diagnosis test Q matrix correct identification rate D1NA model
  • 相关文献

参考文献17

  • 1涂冬波,蔡艳,戴海琦.几种常用非补偿型认知诊断模型的比较与选用:基于属性层级关系的考量[J].心理学报,2013,45(2):243-252. 被引量:21
  • 2涂冬波,蔡艳,戴海琦.基于DINA模型的Q矩阵修正方法[J].心理学报,2012,44(4):558-568. 被引量:39
  • 3Akaike, H. (1974). A new look at the statistical model indentifieation. IEEE Transac6ons on Automac Control, 19, 716-722.
  • 4Chen, J., de la Ton'e, & Zao, Z. (2013). Relative and absolute fit evaluation in cognitive diagnosis modeling. JoumM of Educational Measurement.
  • 5Cui, Y., Leighton, J. P., Gierl, M. J., & Hunka, S. (2006). A peon-fit statistic: for the attribute hierarchy method: The hierarchy consistency index. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, San FraneJsco, CA.
  • 6de la Torre, J. (2008). An empirically based method of Q-matrix validation for the DINA model: Development and applications. Journal of Educatlonal Measurement, 45(4), 346-362.
  • 7DeCarlo, L. T. (2011). On the analysis of fraction subtraction data: The DINA model, classification, latent class sizes, and the Q-matrix. Applied PsychologicM Measurement, 35(1), 8-24.
  • 8DeCarlo, L. T. (2012). Recognizing uncertainty in the Q-Matrix via a Bayesian Extension of the DINA model. Applied Psychological Measurement, 36(6), 447-468.
  • 9Hartz, S. (2002). A Bayesian framework for the unified model for assessing cognitive abliees: Blench'ng theory with practicality. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
  • 10Li, H., &Suen, H. K. (2013). Constructing and validating a Q-Matrix for cognitive diagnostic analyses of a reading test EducationalAsesment, 18(1), 1-25.

二级参考文献34

  • 1Cheng, Y. (2008). Computerized adaptive testing: New development and applications. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
  • 2DeCarlo, L. T. (2011). On the analysis of fraction subtraction data: The DINA model, classification, latent class sizes, and Q-matrix., Applied Psychological Measurement, 35(1), 8-24.
  • 3Fu, J., & Li, Y. (2007, Apirl). Cognitively diagnostic psychometric models: An integrative review. Paper presented at the National Council on Measurement in Education, Chicago, IL.
  • 4Hartz, S., Roussos, L., & Stout, W. (2002). A bayesian framework for the unified model for assessing cognitive abilities: Blending theory with practicality. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
  • 5Junker, B., & Sijtsma, K. (2001). Cognitive assessment models with few assumptions, and connections with nonparametric item response theory. Applied Psychological Measurement, 25(3), 258-272.
  • 6Leighton, J. P., & Gierl, M. (2007). Cognitive diagnostic assessment for education: Theory and Applications. Cambridge (pp242-274), UK: Cambridge uUniversity Press.
  • 7Leighton, J. P., Gierl M., & Hunka, S. M. (2004). The attribute hierarchy method for cognitive assessment: A variation on Tatsuoka's rule-space approach. Journal of eEducational mMeasurement, 41(3), 205-236.
  • 8Rupp, A. A., & Templin, J. (2008). The effects of Q-Matrix misspecification on parameter estimates and classification accuracy in DINA model. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 68(1), 78-96.
  • 9Tatsuoka, K. K. (1995). Architecture of knowledge structure and cognitive diagnosis: A statistical pattern recognition and classification approach. In P. D. Nichols, S. F. Chipman & R. L. Brennan (Eds.), Cognitively Diagnostic Assessment (pp. 327-361). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • 10Tatsuoka, K. K. (2009). Cognitive Assessment: An introduction of the rule space method. New York: Routledge: Taylor & Francis Group.

共引文献57

同被引文献38

引证文献3

二级引证文献2

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部