| PP_4pl | R Documentation |
Compute Person Parameters for the 1/2/3/4-PL model and choose between five common estimation techniques: ML, WL, MAP, EAP and a robust estimation. All item parameters are treated as fixed.
PP_4pl(
respm,
thres,
slopes = NULL,
lowerA = NULL,
upperA = NULL,
theta_start = NULL,
mu = NULL,
sigma2 = NULL,
type = "wle",
maxsteps = 100,
exac = 0.001,
H = 1,
ctrl = list(),
range = c(-6, 6),
verbose = FALSE
)
respm |
An integer matrix (or a data.frame), which contains the responses of the examinees. A persons x items matrix is expected. Missing responses are |
thres |
A numeric vector or a numeric matrix which contains the threshold parameter (also known as difficulty parameter or beta parameter) for each item. A matrix with one column per item is also accepted; its first row of zeros (as in |
slopes |
A numeric vector, which contains the slope parameters for each item - one parameter per item is expected. A single value is used for all items. If |
lowerA |
A numeric vector, which contains the lower asymptote parameters (kind of guessing parameter) for each item. A single value is used for all items. If |
upperA |
numeric vector, which contains the upper asymptote parameters for each item. A single value is used for all items. If |
theta_start |
A vector which contains a starting value for each person. If NULL is submitted, the starting values are set automatically. If a scalar is submitted, this start value is used for each person. |
mu |
A numeric vector of location parameters for each person, the normal prior for MAP and EAP estimation and for |
sigma2 |
A numeric vector of variance parameters for each person, the normal prior for MAP and EAP estimation and for |
type |
Which maximization should be applied? There are five valid entries possible: "mle", "wle", "map", "eap" and "robust". To choose between the methods, or just to get a deeper understanding the papers mentioned below are quite helpful. The default is |
maxsteps |
The maximum number of Newton steps per person. Default = 100. |
exac |
How accurate are the estimates supposed to be? The iteration of a person stops when the step is smaller than |
H |
In case |
ctrl |
No longer used. Its options |
range |
The interval |
verbose |
If |
With this function you can estimate:
1-PL model (Rasch model) by submitting: the data matrix, item difficulties and nothing else, since the 1-PL model is merely a 4-PL model with: any slope = 1, any lower asymptote = 0 and any upper asymptote = 1!
2-PL model by submitting: the data matrix, item difficulties and slope parameters. Lower and upper asymptotes are automatically set to 0 and 1 respectively.
3-PL model by submitting anything except the upper asymptote parameters
4-PL model by submitting all parameters.
The probability function of the 4-PL model is:
P(x_{ij} = 1 | \hat \alpha_i, \hat\beta_i, \hat\gamma_i, \hat\delta_i, \theta_j ) = \hat\gamma_i + (\hat\delta_i-\hat\gamma_i) \frac{exp(\hat \alpha_i (\theta_{j} - \hat\beta_{i}))}{\,1 + exp(\hat\alpha_i (\theta_{j} - \hat\beta_{i}))}
In our case \theta is to be estimated, and the four item parameters are assumed as fixed (usually these are estimates of a former scaling procedure).
The 3-PL model is the same, except that \delta_i = 1, \forall i.
In the 2-PL model \delta_i = 1, \gamma_i = 0, \forall i.
In the 1-PL model \delta_i = 1, \gamma_i = 0, \alpha_i = 1, \forall i.
The robust estimation method, applies a Huber-type estimator (Schuster & Yuan, 2011), which downweights responses to items which provide little information for the ability estimation. First a residuum is estimated and on this basis, the weight for each observation is computed.
residuum:
r_i = \alpha_i(\theta - \beta_i)
weight:
w(r_i) = 1 \rightarrow if\, |r_i| \leq H
w(r_i) = H/|r| \rightarrow if\, |r_i| > H
An object of class ppeo (and fourpl, gpcm or gpcm4pl), a list with
estimatesA data.frame with one row per person, in the order of respm: estimate, SE, nsteps (Newton steps of the person; 0 for eap) and status, a factor with the levels
"ok": converged inside range,
"extreme": mle or robust estimate of a person with all answers in the lowest or highest category, the estimate is -Inf or Inf and the SE NA,
"boundary": the estimating equation has no root inside range, the estimate is the bound,
"no_response": the person answered no item, estimate and SE are NA (eap: prior mean and SD),
"not_converged": no convergence within maxsteps.
A warning reports persons with status "boundary" or "not_converged".
type, callThe estimation type and the call.
modelThe checked and prepared inputs.
resPPThe result in the layout of earlier versions: resPP$resPP is the persons x 2 matrix of estimates and SEs, resPP$nsteps the largest number of steps.
Use coef() for the estimates, as.data.frame() for the table and plot() for the measurement precision, the person fit map or person profiles (see pp-plots).
Manuel Reif
Baker, Frank B., and Kim, Seock-Ho (2004). Item Response Theory - Parameter Estimation Techniques. CRC-Press.
Barton, M. A., & Lord, F. M. (1981). An Upper Asymptote for the Three-Parameter Logistic Item-Response Model.
Birnbaum, A. (1968). Some latent trait models and their use in inferring an examinee's ability. In Lord, F.M. & Novick, M.R. (Eds.), Statistical theories of mental test scores. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Magis, D. (2013). A note on the item information function of the four-parameter logistic model. Applied Psychological Measurement, 37(4), 304-315.
Samejima, Fumiko (1993). The bias function of the maximum likelihood estimate of ability for the dichotomous response level. Psychometrika, 58, 195-209.
Samejima, Fumiko (1993). An approximation of the bias function of the maximum likelihood estimate of a latent variable for the general case where the item responses are discrete. Psychometrika, 58, 119-138.
Schuster, C., & Yuan, K. H. (2011). Robust estimation of latent ability in item response models. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 36(6), 720-735.
Warm, Thomas A. (1989). Weighted Likelihood Estimation Of Ability In Item Response Theory. Psychometrika, 54, 427-450.
Yen, Y.-C., Ho, R.-G., Liao, W.-W., Chen, L.-J., & Kuo, C.-C. (2012). An empirical evaluation of the slip correction in the four parameter logistic models with computerized adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 36, 75-87.
PPass, PPall, PP_gpcm, JKpp, PV
## real data: an adaptive intelligence test with known item difficulties (1PL)
data(pp_amt)
d <- as.matrix(pp_amt$daten_amt[, -(1:7)])
res <- PP_4pl(respm = d, thres = pp_amt$betas[, 2], type = "wle")
summary(res)
## simulated data: 2PL, 3PL and 4PL
set.seed(1522)
b <- seq(-3, 3, length = 12)
sl <- round(runif(12, 0.5, 1.5), 2)
la <- round(runif(12, 0, 0.25), 2)
ua <- round(runif(12, 0.8, 1), 2)
x <- sim_4pl(beta = b, alpha = sl, lowerA = la, upperA = ua, theta = rnorm(50))
res2pl <- PP_4pl(respm = x, thres = b, slopes = sl, type = "mle")
res3pl <- PP_4pl(respm = x, thres = b, slopes = sl, lowerA = la, type = "wle")
res4pl <- PP_4pl(respm = x, thres = b, slopes = sl, lowerA = la, upperA = ua, type = "map")
# persons with all answers right (or wrong) have no finite ML estimate
table(res2pl$estimates$status)
head(res3pl$estimates)
coef(res4pl)[1:5]
## EAP with person-specific priors
res_eap <- PP_4pl(respm = x, thres = b, slopes = sl, type = "eap",
mu = rep(c(-0.5, 0.5), 25), sigma2 = 0.8)
## robust estimation: the example of Schuster & Yuan (2011)
AWM <- matrix(0, 7, 7)
diag(AWM) <- 1
coef(PP_4pl(respm = AWM, thres = -3:3, type = "mle"))
coef(PP_4pl(respm = AWM, thres = -3:3, type = "robust"))
Add the following code to your website.
For more information on customizing the embed code, read Embedding Snippets.