IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jclass/v30y2013i2p195-224.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Incorporating Student Covariates in Cognitive Diagnosis Models

Author

Listed:
  • Elizabeth Ayers
  • Sophia Rabe-Hesketh
  • Rebecca Nugent

Abstract

In educational measurement, cognitive diagnosis models have been developed to allow assessment of specific skills that are needed to perform tasks. Skill knowledge is characterized as present or absent and represented by a vector of binary indicators, or the skill set profile. After determining which skills are needed for each assessment item, a model is specified for the relationship between item responses and skill set profiles. Cognitive diagnosis models are often used for diagnosis, that is, for classifying students into the different skill set profiles. Generally, cognitive diagnosis models do not exploit student covariate information. However, investigating the effects of student covariates, such as gender, SES, or educational interventions, on skill knowledge mastery is important in education research, and covariate information may improve classification of students to skill set profiles. We extend a common cognitive diagnosis model, the DINA model, by modeling the relationship between the latent skill knowledge indicators and covariates. The probability of skill mastery is modeled as a logistic regression model, possibly with a student-level random intercept, giving a higher-order DINA model with a latent regression. Simulations show that parameter recovery is good for these models and that inclusion of covariates can improve skill diagnosis. When applying our methods to data from an online tutor, we obtain reasonable and interpretable parameter estimates that allow more detailed characterization of groups of students who differ in their predicted skill set profiles. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Suggested Citation

  • Elizabeth Ayers & Sophia Rabe-Hesketh & Rebecca Nugent, 2013. "Incorporating Student Covariates in Cognitive Diagnosis Models," Journal of Classification, Springer;The Classification Society, vol. 30(2), pages 195-224, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:jclass:v:30:y:2013:i:2:p:195-224
    DOI: 10.1007/s00357-013-9130-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s00357-013-9130-y
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s00357-013-9130-y?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. Chia-Yi Chiu & Jeffrey Douglas & Xiaodong Li, 2009. "Cluster Analysis for Cognitive Diagnosis: Theory and Applications," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 74(4), pages 633-665, December.
    2. Klaus Larsen & Jørgen Holm Petersen & Esben Budtz-Jørgensen & Lars Endahl, 2000. "Interpreting Parameters in the Logistic Regression Model with Random Effects," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 56(3), pages 909-914, September.
    3. Susan Embretson (Whitely), 1984. "A general latent trait model for response processes," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 49(2), pages 175-186, June.
    4. William Meredith, 1993. "Measurement invariance, factor analysis and factorial invariance," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 58(4), pages 525-543, December.
    5. 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.
    6. Lawrence Hubert & Phipps Arabie, 1985. "Comparing partitions," Journal of Classification, Springer;The Classification Society, vol. 2(1), pages 193-218, December.
    7. Michel Wedel, 2002. "Concomitant variables in finite mixture models," Statistica Neerlandica, Netherlands Society for Statistics and Operations Research, vol. 56(3), pages 362-375, August.
    8. Sun-Joo Cho & Allan S. Cohen, 2010. "A Multilevel Mixture IRT Model With an Application to DIF," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 35(3), pages 336-370, June.
    9. E. Maris, 1999. "Estimating multiple classification latent class models," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 64(2), pages 187-212, June.
    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 & 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.
    2. 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.

    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. Chia-Yi Chiu & Hans-Friedrich Köhn, 2019. "Consistency Theory for the General Nonparametric Classification Method," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 84(3), pages 830-845, September.
    2. 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.
    3. Ping Chen & Tao Xin & Chun Wang & Hua-Hua Chang, 2012. "Online Calibration Methods for the DINA Model with Independent Attributes in CD-CAT," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 77(2), pages 201-222, April.
    4. Hans-Friedrich Köhn & Chia-Yi Chiu, 2019. "Attribute Hierarchy Models in Cognitive Diagnosis: Identifiability of the Latent Attribute Space and Conditions for Completeness of the Q-Matrix," Journal of Classification, Springer;The Classification Society, vol. 36(3), pages 541-565, October.
    5. Chia-Yi Chiu & Jeff Douglas, 2013. "A Nonparametric Approach to Cognitive Diagnosis by Proximity to Ideal Response Patterns," Journal of Classification, Springer;The Classification Society, vol. 30(2), pages 225-250, July.
    6. 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.
    7. Steven Andrew Culpepper, 2019. "Estimating the Cognitive Diagnosis $$\varvec{Q}$$ Q Matrix with Expert Knowledge: Application to the Fraction-Subtraction Dataset," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 84(2), pages 333-357, June.
    8. Susan Embretson & Xiangdong Yang, 2013. "A Multicomponent Latent Trait Model for Diagnosis," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 78(1), pages 14-36, January.
    9. Yinyin Chen & Steven Culpepper & Feng Liang, 2020. "A Sparse Latent Class Model for Cognitive Diagnosis," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 85(1), pages 121-153, March.
    10. Hans-Friedrich Köhn & Chia-Yi Chiu, 2016. "A Proof of the Duality of the DINA Model and the DINO Model," Journal of Classification, Springer;The Classification Society, vol. 33(2), pages 171-184, July.
    11. Hans-Friedrich Köhn & Chia-Yi Chiu, 2018. "How to Build a Complete Q-Matrix for a Cognitively Diagnostic Test," Journal of Classification, Springer;The Classification Society, vol. 35(2), pages 273-299, July.
    12. Douglas L. Steinley & M. J. Brusco, 2019. "Using an Iterative Reallocation Partitioning Algorithm to Verify Test Multidimensionality," Journal of Classification, Springer;The Classification Society, vol. 36(3), pages 397-413, October.
    13. Guanhua Fang & Jingchen Liu & Zhiliang Ying, 2019. "On the Identifiability of Diagnostic Classification Models," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 84(1), pages 19-40, March.
    14. Hans-Friedrich Köhn & Chia-Yi Chiu, 2017. "A Procedure for Assessing the Completeness of the Q-Matrices of Cognitively Diagnostic Tests," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 82(1), pages 112-132, March.
    15. Sanjeena Subedi & Drew Neish & Stephen Bak & Zeny Feng, 2020. "Cluster analysis of microbiome data by using mixtures of Dirichlet–multinomial regression models," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 69(5), pages 1163-1187, November.
    16. 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.
    17. Youn Seon Lim & Fritz Drasgow, 2019. "Conditional Independence and Dimensionality of Cognitive Diagnostic Models: a Test for Model Fit," Journal of Classification, Springer;The Classification Society, vol. 36(2), pages 295-305, July.
    18. Gabriele Perrone & Gabriele Soffritti, 2023. "Seemingly unrelated clusterwise linear regression for contaminated data," Statistical Papers, Springer, vol. 64(3), pages 883-921, June.
    19. Chia-Yi Chiu & Yan Sun & Yanhong Bian, 2018. "Cognitive Diagnosis for Small Educational Programs: The General Nonparametric Classification Method," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 83(2), pages 355-375, June.
    20. Chia-Yi Chiu & Jeffrey Douglas & Xiaodong Li, 2009. "Cluster Analysis for Cognitive Diagnosis: Theory and Applications," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 74(4), pages 633-665, December.

    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:jclass:v:30:y:2013:i:2:p:195-224. 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.