Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Standard Errors of IRT Parameter Scale Transformation Coefficients: Comparison of Bootstrap Method, Delta Method, and Multiple Imputation Method
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Standard Errors of IRT Parameter Scale Transformation Coefficients: Comparison of Bootstrap Method, Delta Method, and Multiple Imputation Method
Do you wish to request the book?
Standard Errors of IRT Parameter Scale Transformation Coefficients: Comparison of Bootstrap Method, Delta Method, and Multiple Imputation Method
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Standard Errors of IRT Parameter Scale Transformation Coefficients: Comparison of Bootstrap Method, Delta Method, and Multiple Imputation Method
2019
Overview
The present study evaluated the multiple imputation method, a procedure that is similar to the one suggested by Li and Lissitz (2004), and compared the performance of this method with that of the bootstrap method and the delta method in obtaining the standard errors for the estimates of the parameter scale transformation coefficients in item response theory (IRT) equating in the context of the common-item nonequivalent groups design. Two different estimation procedures for the variancecovariance matrix of the IRT item parameter estimates, which were used in both the delta method and the multiple imputation method, were considered: empirical cross-product (XPD) and supplemented expectation maximization (SEM). The results of the analyses with simulated and real data indicate that the multiple imputation method generally produced very similar results to the bootstrap method and the delta method in most of the conditions. The differences between the estimated standard errors obtained by the methods using the XPD matrices and the SEM matrices were very small when the sample size was reasonably large. When the sample size was small, the methods using the XPD matrices appeared to yield slight upward bias for the standard errors of the IRT parameter scale transformation coefficients.
