IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/osfxxx/u8kf5.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Comparing Different Trend Estimation Approaches in International Large-Scale Assessment Studies

Author

Listed:
  • Robitzsch, Alexander
  • Lüdtke, Oliver

Abstract

One major aim of international large-scale assessments (ILSA) like PISA is to monitor changes in student performance over time. To accomplish this task, a set of common items (i.e., link items) is repeatedly administered in each assessment. Linking methods based on item response theory (IRT) models are used to align the results from the different assessments on a common scale. This work employs the one-parameter logistic (1PL) and the two-parameter logistic (2PL) IRT models as scaling models for dichotomous item response data. The present article discusses different types of trend estimates for countries in ILSA. These types differ in three aspects. First, the trend can be assessed by an indirect or direct linking approach for linking a country’s performance at an international metric. Second, the linking for the trend estimation can rely on either all items or only the link items. Third, item parameters can be assumed to be invariant or noninvariant across countries. It is shown that the most often employed trend estimation methods of original trends and marginal trends can be conceived as particular cases in this classification. Through a simulation study, it is demonstrated that trend estimates using a direct linking approach and those that rely on only link items outperformed alternatives for the 1PL model with uniform country differential item functioning (DIF) and the 2PL model with uniform and nonuniform country DIF. We also illustrated the performance of the different scaling models for assessing the PISA trend from PISA 2006 to PISA 2009 in the cognitive domains of reading, mathematics, and science. In this empirical application, linking errors based on jackknifing testlets were utilized that adequately quantify DIF effects in the uncertainty of trend estimates.

Suggested Citation

  • Robitzsch, Alexander & Lüdtke, Oliver, 2022. "Comparing Different Trend Estimation Approaches in International Large-Scale Assessment Studies," OSF Preprints u8kf5, Center for Open Science.
  • Handle: RePEc:osf:osfxxx:u8kf5
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/u8kf5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/636fa1420e715d18b1a99bca/
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/u8kf5?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. Simon Grund & Oliver Lüdtke & Alexander Robitzsch, 2021. "On the Treatment of Missing Data in Background Questionnaires in Educational Large-Scale Assessments: An Evaluation of Different Procedures," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 46(4), pages 430-465, August.
    2. Stanislav Kolenikov, 2010. "Resampling variance estimation for complex survey data," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 10(2), pages 165-199, 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. Robert E. Hall & Sam Schulhofer-Wohl, 2018. "Measuring Job-Finding Rates and Matching Efficiency with Heterogeneous Job-Seekers," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 10(1), pages 1-32, January.
    2. Armin Falk & Fabian Kosse & Pia Pinger & Hannah Schildberg-Hörisch & Thomas Deckers, 2021. "Socioeconomic Status and Inequalities in Children’s IQ and Economic Preferences," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 129(9), pages 2504-2545.
    3. Tim Goedemé, 2013. "How much Confidence can we have in EU-SILC? Complex Sample Designs and the Standard Error of the Europe 2020 Poverty Indicators," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 110(1), pages 89-110, January.
    4. James G. MacKinnon, 2019. "How cluster-robust inference is changing applied econometrics," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 52(3), pages 851-881, August.
    5. Marie T. Mora & Alberto D?vila, 2014. "Gender and Business Outcomes of Black and Hispanic New Entrepreneurs in the United States," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(5), pages 245-249, May.
    6. Owen Gallupe & Martin Bouchard, 2015. "The influence of positional and experienced social benefits on the relationship between peers and alcohol use," Rationality and Society, , vol. 27(1), pages 40-69, February.
    7. Heng Chen & Q. Rallye Shen, 2019. "Variance Estimation for Survey-Weighted Data Using Bootstrap Resampling Methods: 2013 Methods-of-Payment Survey Questionnaire," Advances in Econometrics, in: The Econometrics of Complex Survey Data, volume 39, pages 87-106, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    8. Blanca Estela Pelcastre-Villafuerte & Leticia Avila-Burgos & Sergio Meneses-Navarro & Nadia Cerecer-Ortiz & Julio César Montañez-Hernández, 2023. "Use of Outpatient Health Services by Mexicans Aged 15 Years and Older, According to Ethnicity," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(4), pages 1-18, February.
    9. Matthew Robson & Miqdad Asaria & Richard Cookson & Aki Tsuchiya & Shehzad Ali, 2017. "Eliciting the Level of Health Inequality Aversion in England," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(10), pages 1328-1334, October.
    10. Robitzsch, Alexander & Lüdtke, Oliver, 2023. "Comparing Different Trend Estimation Approaches in International Large-Scale Assessment Studies," OSF Preprints u8kf5_v1, Center for Open Science.
    11. Mike Brewer & Liam Wren-Lewis, 2016. "Accounting for Changes in Income Inequality: Decomposition Analyses for the UK, 1978–2008," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 78(3), pages 289-322, June.
    12. Michal Brzezinski, 2011. "Accounting for recent trends in absolute poverty in Poland: a decomposition analysis," Post-Communist Economies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(4), pages 465-475, December.
    13. Paul Eckerstorfer & Johannes Halak & Jakob Kapeller & Bernhard Schütz & Florian Springholz & Rafael Wildauer, 2014. "Correcting wealth survey data for the missing rich: The case of Austria," Economics working papers 2014-01, Department of Economics, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Austria.
    14. Andric, Mateja & Hsueh, Josh Wei-Jun & Zellweger, Thomas & Hatak, Isabella, 2024. "Parental divorce in early life and entrepreneurial performance in adulthood," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 39(3).
    15. Christopher Barrett & Cissé Jennifer Denno, 2016. "Working Paper 236 - Estimating Development Resilience: A Conditional Moments-Based Approach," Working Paper Series 2340, African Development Bank.
    16. Pietro Santoleri, 2020. "Innovation and job creation in (high-growth) new firms," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 29(3), pages 731-756.
    17. Xie, Zilong & Chen, Yunxiao & von Davier, Matthias & Weng, Haolei, 2023. "Variable selection in latent variable models via knockoffs: an application to international large-scale assessment in education," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 120812, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    18. Himelein, Kristen & Eckman, Stephanie & Murray, Siobhan, 2013. "The use of random geographic cluster sampling to survey pastoralists," Policy Research Working Paper Series 6589, The World Bank.
    19. James G. MacKinnon & Matthew D. Webb, 2020. "When and How to Deal with Clustered Errors in Regression Models," Working Paper 1421, Economics Department, Queen's University.
    20. Rodrigo M. Leifert & Claudio R. Lucinda, 2015. "Linear Symmetric "Fat Taxes": Evidence from Brazil," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 37(4), pages 634-666.

    More about this item

    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:osf:osfxxx:u8kf5. 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://osf.io/preprints/ .

    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.