IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jedbes/v44y2019i3p251-281.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Longitudinal Higher-Order Diagnostic Classification Model

Author

Listed:
  • Peida Zhan

    (Zhejiang Normal University)

  • Hong Jiao

    (University of Maryland)

  • Dandan Liao

    (American Institutes for Research)

  • Feiming Li

    (Zhejiang Normal University)

Abstract

Providing diagnostic feedback about growth is crucial to formative decisions such as targeted remedial instructions or interventions. This article proposed a longitudinal higher-order diagnostic classification modeling approach for measuring growth. The new modeling approach is able to provide quantitative values of overall and individual growth by constructing a multidimensional higher-order latent structure to take into account the correlations among multiple latent attributes that are examined across different occasions. In addition, potential local item dependence among anchor (or repeated) items can be taken into account. Model parameter estimation is explored in a simulation study. An empirical example is analyzed to illustrate the applications and advantages of the proposed modeling approach.

Suggested Citation

  • Peida Zhan & Hong Jiao & Dandan Liao & Feiming Li, 2019. "A Longitudinal Higher-Order Diagnostic Classification Model," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 44(3), pages 251-281, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:jedbes:v:44:y:2019:i:3:p:251-281
    DOI: 10.3102/1076998619827593
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.3102/1076998619827593
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.3102/1076998619827593?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Erling Andersen, 1985. "Estimating latent correlations between repeated testings," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 50(1), pages 3-16, March.
    2. Matthias Davier & Xueli Xu & Claus Carstensen, 2011. "Measuring Growth in a Longitudinal Large-Scale Assessment with a General Latent Variable Model," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 76(2), pages 318-336, April.
    3. 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.
    4. Jimmy Torre & Jeffrey Douglas, 2004. "Higher-order latent trait models for cognitive diagnosis," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 69(3), pages 333-353, September.
    5. Jean-Paul Fox & Cees Glas, 2001. "Bayesian estimation of a multilevel IRT model using gibbs sampling," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 66(2), pages 271-288, June.
    6. Li Cai, 2010. "High-dimensional Exploratory Item Factor Analysis by A Metropolis–Hastings Robbins–Monro Algorithm," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 75(1), pages 33-57, March.
    7. Gerhard Fischer, 1995. "Some neglected problems in IRT," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 60(4), pages 459-487, December.
    8. Susan Embretson, 1991. "A multidimensional latent trait model for measuring learning and change," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 56(3), pages 495-515, September.
    9. Eric Bradlow & Howard Wainer & Xiaohui Wang, 1999. "A Bayesian random effects model for testlets," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 64(2), pages 153-168, June.
    10. Andrade, Dalton F. & Tavares, Heliton R., 2005. "Item response theory for longitudinal data: population parameter estimation," Journal of Multivariate Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 95(1), pages 1-22, July.
    11. Jimmy de la Torre, 2011. "The Generalized DINA Model Framework," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 76(2), pages 179-199, April.
    12. Jimmy Torre, 2011. "Erratum to: The Generalized DINA Model Framework," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 76(3), pages 510-510, July.
    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. Peida Zhan & Xin Qiao, 2022. "DIAGNOSTIC Classification Analysis of Problem-Solving Competence using Process Data: An Item Expansion Method," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 87(4), pages 1529-1547, December.
    2. Hiroshi Tamano & Daichi Mochihashi, 2023. "Dynamical Non-compensatory Multidimensional IRT Model Using Variational Approximation," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 88(2), pages 487-526, June.
    3. Shiyu Wang & Yinghan Chen, 2020. "Using Response Times and Response Accuracy to Measure Fluency Within Cognitive Diagnosis Models," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 85(3), pages 600-629, September.
    4. Yan Li & Chao Huang & Jia Liu, 2023. "Diagnosing Primary Students’ Reading Progression: Is Cognitive Diagnostic Computerized Adaptive Testing the Way Forward?," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 48(6), pages 842-865, December.

    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. Matthias Davier & Xueli Xu & Claus Carstensen, 2011. "Measuring Growth in a Longitudinal Large-Scale Assessment with a General Latent Variable Model," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 76(2), pages 318-336, April.
    2. Chun Wang & Steven W. Nydick, 2020. "On Longitudinal Item Response Theory Models: A Didactic," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 45(3), pages 339-368, June.
    3. Chen-Wei Liu & Björn Andersson & Anders Skrondal, 2020. "A Constrained Metropolis–Hastings Robbins–Monro Algorithm for Q Matrix Estimation in DINA Models," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 85(2), pages 322-357, June.
    4. Motonori Oka & Kensuke Okada, 2023. "Scalable Bayesian Approach for the Dina Q-Matrix Estimation Combining Stochastic Optimization and Variational Inference," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 88(1), pages 302-331, March.
    5. Ragip Terzi & Sedat Sen, 2019. "A Nondiagnostic Assessment for Diagnostic Purposes: Q-Matrix Validation and Item-Based Model Fit Evaluation for the TIMSS 2011 Assessment," SAGE Open, , vol. 9(1), pages 21582440198, February.
    6. Peida Zhan & Xin Qiao, 2022. "DIAGNOSTIC Classification Analysis of Problem-Solving Competence using Process Data: An Item Expansion Method," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 87(4), pages 1529-1547, December.
    7. Siliang Zhang & Yunxiao Chen, 2022. "Computation for Latent Variable Model Estimation: A Unified Stochastic Proximal Framework," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 87(4), pages 1473-1502, December.
    8. Zhang, Siliang & Chen, Yunxiao, 2022. "Computation for latent variable model estimation: a unified stochastic proximal framework," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 114489, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    9. Matthew S. Johnson & Sandip Sinharay, 2020. "The Reliability of the Posterior Probability of Skill Attainment in Diagnostic Classification Models," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 45(1), pages 5-31, February.
    10. Michael Edwards, 2010. "A Markov Chain Monte Carlo Approach to Confirmatory Item Factor Analysis," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 75(3), pages 474-497, September.
    11. 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.
    12. Hans Friedrich Köhn & Chia-Yi Chiu, 2021. "A Unified Theory of the Completeness of Q-Matrices for the DINA Model," Journal of Classification, Springer;The Classification Society, vol. 38(3), pages 500-518, October.
    13. Jimmy de la Torre & Xue-Lan Qiu & Kevin Carl Santos, 2022. "An Empirical Q-Matrix Validation Method for the Polytomous G-DINA Model," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 87(2), pages 693-724, June.
    14. Qianru Liang & Jimmy de la Torre & Nancy Law, 2023. "Latent Transition Cognitive Diagnosis Model With Covariates: A Three-Step Approach," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 48(6), pages 690-718, December.
    15. Zhehan Jiang & Jonathan Templin, 2019. "Gibbs Samplers for Logistic Item Response Models via the Pólya–Gamma Distribution: A Computationally Efficient Data-Augmentation Strategy," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 84(2), pages 358-374, June.
    16. Minjeong Jeon & Sophia Rabe-Hesketh, 2016. "An autoregressive growth model for longitudinal item analysis," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 81(3), pages 830-850, September.
    17. Frank Rijmen & Minjeong Jeon & Matthias von Davier & Sophia Rabe-Hesketh, 2014. "A Third-Order Item Response Theory Model for Modeling the Effects of Domains and Subdomains in Large-Scale Educational Assessment Surveys," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 39(4), pages 235-256, August.
    18. James Joseph Balamuta & Steven Andrew Culpepper, 2022. "Exploratory Restricted Latent Class Models with Monotonicity Requirements under PÒLYA–GAMMA Data Augmentation," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 87(3), pages 903-945, September.
    19. Kazuhiro Yamaguchi & Kensuke Okada, 2020. "Variational Bayes Inference for the DINA Model," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 45(5), pages 569-597, October.
    20. Peida Zhan & Wen-Chung Wang & Xiaomin Li, 2020. "A Partial Mastery, Higher-Order Latent Structural Model for Polytomous Attributes in Cognitive Diagnostic Assessments," Journal of Classification, Springer;The Classification Society, vol. 37(2), pages 328-351, July.

    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:sae:jedbes:v:44:y:2019:i:3:p:251-281. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.