IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/annopr/v206y2013i1p627-64610.1007-s10479-012-1204-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Optimizing information using the EM algorithm in item response theory

Author

Listed:
  • Alexander Weissman

Abstract

Latent trait models such as item response theory (IRT) hypothesize a functional relationship between an unobservable, or latent, variable and an observable outcome variable. In educational measurement, a discrete item response is usually the observable outcome variable, and the latent variable is associated with an examinee’s trait level (e.g., skill, proficiency). The link between the two variables is called an item response function. This function, defined by a set of item parameters, models the probability of observing a given item response, conditional on a specific trait level. Typically in a measurement setting, neither the item parameters nor the trait levels are known, and so must be estimated from the pattern of observed item responses. Although a maximum likelihood approach can be taken in estimating these parameters, it usually cannot be employed directly. Instead, a method of marginal maximum likelihood (MML) is utilized, via the expectation-maximization (EM) algorithm. Alternating between an expectation (E) step and a maximization (M) step, the EM algorithm assures that the marginal log likelihood function will not decrease after each EM cycle, and will converge to a local maximum. Interestingly, the negative of this marginal log likelihood function is equal to the relative entropy, or Kullback-Leibler divergence, between the conditional distribution of the latent variables given the observable variables and the joint likelihood of the latent and observable variables. With an unconstrained optimization for the M-step proposed here, the EM algorithm as minimization of Kullback-Leibler divergence admits the convergence results due to Csiszár and Tusnády (Statistics & Decisions, 1:205–237, 1984 ), a consequence of the binomial likelihood common to latent trait models with dichotomous response variables. For this unconstrained optimization, the EM algorithm converges to a global maximum of the marginal log likelihood function, yielding an information bound that permits a fixed point of reference against which models may be tested. A likelihood ratio test between marginal log likelihood functions obtained through constrained and unconstrained M-steps is provided as a means for testing models against this bound. Empirical examples demonstrate the approach. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2013

Suggested Citation

  • Alexander Weissman, 2013. "Optimizing information using the EM algorithm in item response theory," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 206(1), pages 627-646, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:annopr:v:206:y:2013:i:1:p:627-646:10.1007/s10479-012-1204-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s10479-012-1204-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10479-012-1204-4
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10479-012-1204-4?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Roger Wets, 1999. "Statistical estimation from an optimization viewpoint," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 85(0), pages 79-101, January.
    3. Spanos,Aris, 1999. "Probability Theory and Statistical Inference," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521424080.
    4. Michael R. Harwell & Frank B. Baker & Michael Zwarts, 1988. "Item Parameter Estimation Via Marginal Maximum Likelihood and an EM Algorithm: A Didactic," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 13(3), pages 243-271, September.
    5. Jimmy de la Torre, 2009. "DINA Model and Parameter Estimation: A Didactic," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 34(1), pages 115-130, March.
    6. Hamparsum Bozdogan, 1987. "Model selection and Akaike's Information Criterion (AIC): The general theory and its analytical extensions," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 52(3), pages 345-370, September.
    7. Pieter-Tjerk de Boer & Dirk Kroese & Shie Mannor & Reuven Rubinstein, 2005. "A Tutorial on the Cross-Entropy Method," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 134(1), pages 19-67, February.
    8. Richard J. Patz & Brian W. Junker, 1999. "A Straightforward Approach to Markov Chain Monte Carlo Methods for Item Response Models," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 24(2), pages 146-178, June.
    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. Alexander Weissman, 2013. "Global Convergence of the EM Algorithm for Unconstrained Latent Variable Models with Categorical Indicators," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 78(1), pages 134-153, January.
    2. Vitoratou, Silia & Ntzoufras, Ioannis & Moustaki, Irini, 2016. "Explaining the behavior of joint and marginal Monte Carlo estimators in latent variable models with independence assumptions," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 57685, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    3. 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.
    4. Norman Rose & Matthias Davier & Benjamin Nagengast, 2017. "Modeling Omitted and Not-Reached Items in IRT Models," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 82(3), pages 795-819, September.
    5. Yang Liu & Ji Seung Yang, 2018. "Bootstrap-Calibrated Interval Estimates for Latent Variable Scores in Item Response Theory," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 83(2), pages 333-354, June.
    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. Javier Revuelta, 2008. "The generalized Logit-Linear Item Response Model for Binary-Designed Items," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 73(3), pages 385-405, September.
    8. Taha Hannachi & Sonya Yakimova & Alain Somat, 2024. "A Follow up on the Continuum Theory of Eco-Anxiety: Analysis of the Climate Change Anxiety Scale Using Item Response Theory among French Speaking Population," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 21(9), pages 1-16, August.
    9. Daniela Andreini & Diego Rinallo & Giuseppe Pedeliento & Mara Bergamaschi, 2017. "Brands and Religion in the Secularized Marketplace and Workplace: Insights from the Case of an Italian Hospital Renamed After a Roman Catholic Pope," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 141(3), pages 529-550, March.
    10. Ying Cheng & Ke-Hai Yuan, 2010. "The Impact of Fallible Item Parameter Estimates on Latent Trait Recovery," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 75(2), pages 280-291, June.
    11. S. A. Abu Bakar & Saralees Nadarajah & Z. A. Absl Kamarul Adzhar, 2018. "Loss modeling using Burr mixtures," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 54(4), pages 1503-1516, June.
    12. Sucarrat, Genaro, 2009. "Forecast Evaluation of Explanatory Models of Financial Variability," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 3, pages 1-33.
    13. Jaewoong Yun, 2023. "Strategies for Improving the Sustainability of Fare-Free Policy for the Elderly through Preferences by Travel Modes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(20), pages 1-14, October.
    14. Malerba, Martino E. & Connolly, Sean R. & Heimann, Kirsten, 2015. "An experimentally validated nitrate–ammonium–phytoplankton model including effects of starvation length and ammonium inhibition on nitrate uptake," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 317(C), pages 30-40.
    15. Alexander Robitzsch, 2024. "Bias-Reduced Haebara and Stocking–Lord Linking," J, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-12, September.
    16. Friederike Paetz, 2016. "Persönlichkeitsmerkmale als Segmentierungsvariablen: Eine empirische Studie [Personality traits for market segmentation: An empirical study]," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 68(3), pages 279-306, August.
    17. Rosbergen, Edward & Wedel, Michel & Pieters, Rik, 1997. "Analyzing visual attention tot repeated print advertising using scanpath theory," Research Report 97B32, University of Groningen, Research Institute SOM (Systems, Organisations and Management).
    18. McGuirk, Anya M. & Spanos, Aris, 2004. "Revisiting Error Autocorrelation Correction: Common Factor Restrictions And Granger Causality," 2004 Annual meeting, August 1-4, Denver, CO 20176, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    19. Aris Spanos & Niki Papadopoulou, 2013. "A Small Macroeconometric Model for the Cyprus Economy," Working Papers 2013-02, Central Bank of Cyprus.
    20. Joel A. Martínez-Regalado & Cinthia Leonora Murillo-Avalos & Purificación Vicente-Galindo & Mónica Jiménez-Hernández & José Luis Vicente-Villardón, 2021. "Using HJ-Biplot and External Logistic Biplot as Machine Learning Methods for Corporate Social Responsibility Practices for Sustainable Development," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(20), pages 1-16, October.

    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:spr:annopr:v:206:y:2013:i:1:p:627-646:10.1007/s10479-012-1204-4. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.