IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/psycho/v80y2015i1p151-181.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cultural Consensus Theory for the Ordinal Data Case

Author

Listed:
  • Royce Anders
  • William Batchelder

Abstract

A Cultural Consensus Theory approach for ordinal data is developed, leading to a new model for ordered polytomous data. The model introduces a novel way of measuring response biases and also measures consensus item values, a consensus response scale, item difficulty, and informant knowledge. The model is extended as a finite mixture model to fit both simulated and real multicultural data, in which subgroups of informants have different sets of consensus item values. The extension is thus a form of model-based clustering for ordinal data. The hierarchical Bayesian framework is utilized for inference, and two posterior predictive checks are developed to verify the central assumptions of the model. Copyright The Psychometric Society 2015

Suggested Citation

  • Royce Anders & William Batchelder, 2015. "Cultural Consensus Theory for the Ordinal Data Case," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 80(1), pages 151-181, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:psycho:v:80:y:2015:i:1:p:151-181
    DOI: 10.1007/s11336-013-9382-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11336-013-9382-9
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11336-013-9382-9?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. Matthew Stephens, 2000. "Dealing with label switching in mixture models," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 62(4), pages 795-809.
    2. William Batchelder & A. Romney, 1988. "Test theory without an answer key," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 53(1), pages 71-92, March.
    3. Yoshio Takane & Jan Leeuw, 1987. "On the relationship between item response theory and factor analysis of discretized variables," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 52(3), pages 393-408, September.
    4. George Karabatsos & William Batchelder, 2003. "Markov chain estimation for test theory without an answer key," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 68(3), pages 373-389, September.
    5. Craig R. Fox & Amos Tversky, 1995. "Ambiguity Aversion and Comparative Ignorance," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 110(3), pages 585-603.
    6. David J. Spiegelhalter & Nicola G. Best & Bradley P. Carlin & Angelika Van Der Linde, 2002. "Bayesian measures of model complexity and fit," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 64(4), pages 583-639, October.
    7. H. Lancaster & M. Hamdan, 1964. "Estimation of the correlation coefficient in contingency tables with possibly nonmetrical characters," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 29(4), pages 383-391, December.
    8. Paul Boeck, 2008. "Random Item IRT Models," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 73(4), pages 533-559, December.
    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. Zita Oravecz & Royce Anders & William Batchelder, 2015. "Hierarchical Bayesian Modeling for Test Theory Without an Answer Key," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 80(2), pages 341-364, June.
    2. 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.
    3. Park, Byung-Jung & Zhang, Yunlong & Lord, Dominique, 2010. "Bayesian mixture modeling approach to account for heterogeneity in speed data," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 44(5), pages 662-673, June.
    4. Papastamoulis, Panagiotis, 2018. "Overfitting Bayesian mixtures of factor analyzers with an unknown number of components," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 220-234.
    5. 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.
    6. Marco, Nicholas & Şentürk, Damla & Jeste, Shafali & DiStefano, Charlotte C. & Dickinson, Abigail & Telesca, Donatello, 2024. "Flexible regularized estimation in high-dimensional mixed membership models," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    7. Hanneke Geerlings & Cees Glas & Wim Linden, 2011. "Modeling Rule-Based Item Generation," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 76(2), pages 337-359, April.
    8. Lu, Xiaosun & Huang, Yangxin & Zhu, Yiliang, 2016. "Finite mixture of nonlinear mixed-effects joint models in the presence of missing and mismeasured covariate, with application to AIDS studies," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 119-130.
    9. Lubrano, Michel & Ndoye, Abdoul Aziz Junior, 2016. "Income inequality decomposition using a finite mixture of log-normal distributions: A Bayesian approach," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 830-846.
    10. Yuan Fang & Dimitris Karlis & Sanjeena Subedi, 2022. "Infinite Mixtures of Multivariate Normal-Inverse Gaussian Distributions for Clustering of Skewed Data," Journal of Classification, Springer;The Classification Society, vol. 39(3), pages 510-552, November.
    11. Terrance Savitsky & Daniel McCaffrey, 2014. "Bayesian Hierarchical Multivariate Formulation with Factor Analysis for Nested Ordinal Data," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 79(2), pages 275-302, April.
    12. Jean-Paul Fox & Joris Mulder & Sandip Sinharay, 2017. "Bayes Factor Covariance Testing in Item Response Models," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 82(4), pages 979-1006, December.
    13. Dora Matzke & Conor Dolan & William Batchelder & Eric-Jan Wagenmakers, 2015. "Bayesian Estimation of Multinomial Processing Tree Models with Heterogeneity in Participants and Items," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 80(1), pages 205-235, March.
    14. Hui, Francis K.C., 2017. "Model-based simultaneous clustering and ordination of multivariate abundance data in ecology," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 1-10.
    15. Gilles Celeux & Florence Forbes & Christian P, Robert & Michael Titterington, 2003. "Deviance Information Criteria for Missing Data Models," Working Papers 2003-30, Center for Research in Economics and Statistics.
    16. Bei Jiang & Michael R. Elliott & Mary D. Sammel & Naisyin Wang, 2015. "Joint modeling of cross-sectional health outcomes and longitudinal predictors via mixtures of means and variances," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 71(2), pages 487-497, June.
    17. Oliver J. Rutz & Garrett P. Sonnier, 2019. "VANISH regularization for generalized linear models," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 17(4), pages 415-437, December.
    18. Brian Neelon & A. James O'Malley & Sharon-Lise T. Normand, 2011. "A Bayesian Two-Part Latent Class Model for Longitudinal Medical Expenditure Data: Assessing the Impact of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Parity," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 67(1), pages 280-289, March.
    19. Shotwell Matthew S & Slate Elizabeth H, 2010. "Bayesian Modeling of Footrace Finishing Times," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 6(3), pages 1-21, July.
    20. Edgar C. Merkle & Daniel Furr & Sophia Rabe-Hesketh, 2019. "Bayesian Comparison of Latent Variable Models: Conditional Versus Marginal Likelihoods," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 84(3), pages 802-829, September.

    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:psycho:v:80:y:2015:i:1:p:151-181. 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.