IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibn/jedpjl/v8y2018i1p14.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Using Item Response Theory to Evaluate Self-directed Learning Readiness Scale

Author

Listed:
  • Rana Momani

Abstract

Item Response Theory becomes one of the most popular methods for instruments development and evaluation methods. This baseline study is a self-directed learning readiness (SDLR) 40 item scale with data from 648 undergraduate psychology female students attending Qassim University in Saudi Arabia through randomized selection to evaluate an SDLR scale at item and scale levels using GRM. Results provide more detailed diagnostic information to modulate the scale. GRM analysis led to the detection of two locally dependent items, one item with low discrimination parameter and 15 model misfit items. The scale often tends to measure low and moderate levels of SDLR. Advanced psychometric evaluations should be made and the SDLR scale must be reviewed based on quantitative and qualitative analysis.

Suggested Citation

  • Rana Momani, 2018. "Using Item Response Theory to Evaluate Self-directed Learning Readiness Scale," Journal of Educational and Developmental Psychology, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 8(1), pages 1-14, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:ibn:jedpjl:v:8:y:2018:i:1:p:14
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/jedp/article/download/71985/39752
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/jedp/article/view/71985
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Albert Maydeu-Olivares & Harry Joe, 2006. "Limited Information Goodness-of-fit Testing in Multidimensional Contingency Tables," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 71(4), pages 713-732, December.
    2. Tam Nguyen & Hae-Ra Han & Miyong Kim & Kitty Chan, 2014. "An Introduction to Item Response Theory for Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 7(1), pages 23-35, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. 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.
    2. Vassilis Vasdekis & Silvia Cagnone & Irini Moustaki, 2012. "A Composite Likelihood Inference in Latent Variable Models for Ordinal Longitudinal Responses," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 77(3), pages 425-441, July.
    3. Prince Destiny Ugo, 2017. "Project Quality Management Performance: An Insight to Sustainable Development Initiatives in Oil and Gas Host Communities," Journal of Management and Sustainability, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 7(4), pages 76-88, December.
    4. Chen, Yunxiao & Moustaki, Irini & Zhang, H, 2020. "A note on likelihood ratio tests for models with latent variables," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 107490, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    5. Aristidis Nikoloulopoulos & Harry Joe, 2015. "Factor Copula Models for Item Response Data," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 80(1), pages 126-150, March.
    6. Shaobo Jin & Fan Yang-Wallentin, 2017. "Asymptotic Robustness Study of the Polychoric Correlation Estimation," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 82(1), pages 67-85, March.
    7. Ick Hoon Jin & Minjeong Jeon, 2019. "A Doubly Latent Space Joint Model for Local Item and Person Dependence in the Analysis of Item Response Data," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 84(1), pages 236-260, March.
    8. Li Cai, 2010. "A Two-Tier Full-Information Item Factor Analysis Model with Applications," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 75(4), pages 581-612, December.
    9. Dominik M. Piehlmaier, 2022. "Overconfidence and the adoption of robo-advice: why overconfident investors drive the expansion of automated financial advice," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 8(1), pages 1-24, December.
    10. Dominik M Piehlmaier & J Jeffrey Inman & Andrew T Stephen & Andrew T Stephen, 2023. "The One-Man Show: The Effect of Joint Decision-Making on Investor Overconfidence," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 50(2), pages 426-446.
    11. Fuchs, Lisa Elena & Orero, Levi & Apondi, Victoria Atieno & Kipkorir, Lang'at, 2021. "How to stop wasting money in international development: Using a structured group selection approach to counter procedural inefficiency," World Development Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 24(C).
    12. Kim, Sung-Ho & Choi, Hyemi & Lee, Sangjin, 2009. "Estimate-based goodness-of-fit test for large sparse multinomial distributions," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 53(4), pages 1122-1131, February.
    13. Salim Moussa, 2016. "A two-step item response theory procedure for a better measurement of marketing constructs," Journal of Marketing Analytics, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 4(1), pages 28-50, March.
    14. Tang, Min & Slud, Eric V. & Pfeiffer, Ruth M., 2014. "Goodness of fit tests for linear mixed models," Journal of Multivariate Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 176-193.
    15. Shenghai Dai & Dubravka Svetina & Xiaolin Wang, 2017. "Reporting Subscores Using R: A Software Review," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 42(5), pages 617-638, October.
    16. Harry Joe & Alberto Maydeu-Olivares, 2010. "A General Family of Limited Information Goodness-of-Fit Statistics for Multinomial Data," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 75(3), pages 393-419, September.
    17. Michal Ďuriník & Jakub Procházka & Hynek Cígler, 2018. "The Short Maximization Inventory," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 13(1), pages 123-136, January.
    18. Genest Christian & Puccetti Giovanni, 2018. "A Journey Beyond The Gaussian World: An interview with Harry Joe," Dependence Modeling, De Gruyter, vol. 6(1), pages 288-297, December.
    19. Joe, Harry & Lee, Youngjo, 2009. "On weighting of bivariate margins in pairwise likelihood," Journal of Multivariate Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 100(4), pages 670-685, April.
    20. Jochen Ranger & Jörg-Tobias Kuhn, 2018. "Estimating Diffusion-Based Item Response Theory Models: Exploring the Robustness of Three Old and Two New Estimators," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 43(6), pages 635-662, December.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    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:ibn:jedpjl:v:8:y:2018:i:1:p:14. 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: Canadian Center of Science and Education (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    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.