Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (OnlineFirst PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Liu, Y.
Right arrow Articles by Yu, L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
First published on October 1, 2007
Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics 2007, doi:10.3102/1076998607306076


Article

Standard Error Estimation of 3PL IRT True Score Equating With an MCMC Method

Yuming Liu*, E. Matthew Schulz, and Lei Yu

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: yuming_liu{at}hmco.com.


   Abstract
A Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) method and a bootstrap method were compared in the estimation of standard errors of item response theory (IRT) true score equating. Three test form relationships were examined: parallel, tau-equivalent, and congeneric. Data were simulated based on Reading Comprehension and Vocabulary tests of the Iowa Tests of Basic Skills®. For parallel and congeneric test forms within valid IRT true score ranges, the pattern and magnitude of standard errors of IRT true score equating estimated by the MCMC method were very close to those estimated by the bootstrap method. For tau-equivalent test forms, the pattern of standard errors estimated by the two methods was also similar. Bias and mean square errors of equating produced by the MCMC method were smaller than those produced by the bootstrap method; however, standard errors were larger. In educational testing, the MCMC method may be used as an additional or alternative procedure to the bootstrap method when evaluating the precision of equating results.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?




AER home page RER home page JEB home page EPA home page RRE home page