311 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19719362)
1. Estimation of IRT graded response models: limited versus full information methods.
Forero CG; Maydeu-Olivares A
Psychol Methods; 2009 Sep; 14(3):275-99. PubMed ID: 19719362
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The impact of nonnormality on full information maximum-likelihood estimation for structural equation models with missing data.
Enders CK
Psychol Methods; 2001 Dec; 6(4):352-70. PubMed ID: 11778677
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. The performance of robust test statistics with categorical data.
Savalei V; Rhemtulla M
Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2013 May; 66(2):201-23. PubMed ID: 22568535
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Estimating the pi* goodness of fit index for finite mixtures of item response models.
Revuelta J
Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2008 May; 61(Pt 1):93-113. PubMed ID: 18482477
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Robustness of Parameter Estimation to Assumptions of Normality in the Multidimensional Graded Response Model.
Wang C; Su S; Weiss DJ
Multivariate Behav Res; 2018; 53(3):403-418. PubMed ID: 29624093
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Bootstrapping the estimated latent distribution of the two-parameter latent trait model.
Knott M; Tzamourani P
Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2007 May; 60(Pt 1):175-91. PubMed ID: 17535586
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. When can categorical variables be treated as continuous? A comparison of robust continuous and categorical SEM estimation methods under suboptimal conditions.
Rhemtulla M; Brosseau-Liard PÉ; Savalei V
Psychol Methods; 2012 Sep; 17(3):354-73. PubMed ID: 22799625
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Analysing multitrait-multimethod data with structural equation models for ordinal variables applying the WLSMV estimator: what sample size is needed for valid results?
Nussbeck FW; Eid M; Lischetzke T
Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2006 May; 59(Pt 1):195-213. PubMed ID: 16709286
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Influence analysis for the factor analysis model with ranking data.
Xu L; Poon WY; Lee SY
Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2008 May; 61(Pt 1):133-61. PubMed ID: 18482479
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Marginal likelihood inference for a model for item responses and response times.
Glas CA; van der Linden WJ
Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2010 Nov; 63(Pt 3):603-26. PubMed ID: 20109271
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Effects of estimation methods on making trait-level inferences from ordered categorical items for assessing psychopathology.
Dumenci L; Achenbach TM
Psychol Assess; 2008 Mar; 20(1):55-62. PubMed ID: 18315399
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Parameter recovery for the partial credit model using MULTILOG.
Choi SW; Cook KF; Dodd BG
J Outcome Meas; 1997; 1(2):114-42. PubMed ID: 9661717
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Conditional pairwise estimation in the Rasch model for ordered response categories using principal components.
Andrich D; Luo G
J Appl Meas; 2003; 4(3):205-21. PubMed ID: 12904672
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. A graded response model for measuring person reliability.
Ferrando PJ
Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2009 Nov; 62(Pt 3):641-62. PubMed ID: 19159504
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Subject-centered scalability: the sine qua non of summated ratings.
Drewes DW
Psychol Methods; 2009 Sep; 14(3):258-74. PubMed ID: 19719361
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. A Monte Carlo study comparing PIV, ULS and DWLS in the estimation of dichotomous confirmatory factor analysis.
Nestler S
Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2013 Feb; 66(1):127-43. PubMed ID: 22524532
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Testing and modelling non-normality within the one-factor model.
Molenaar D; Dolan CV; Verhelst ND
Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2010 May; 63(Pt 2):293-317. PubMed ID: 19796474
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. MCMC estimation for the p(2) network regression model with crossed random effects.
Zijlstra BJ; van Duijn MA; Snijders TA
Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2009 Feb; 62(Pt 1):143-66. PubMed ID: 19208289
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. A better lemon squeezer? Maximum-likelihood regression with beta-distributed dependent variables.
Smithson M; Verkuilen J
Psychol Methods; 2006 Mar; 11(1):54-71. PubMed ID: 16594767
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. The construction and implementation of user-defined fit tests for use with marginal maximum likelihood estimation and generalized item response models.
Adams RJ; Wu ML
J Appl Meas; 2009; 10(4):355-70. PubMed ID: 19934525
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
