148 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29881075)
1. Advancing the Bayesian Approach for Multidimensional Polytomous and Nominal IRT Models: Model Formulations and Fit Measures.
Chen J
Appl Psychol Meas; 2017 Jan; 41(1):3-16. PubMed ID: 29881075
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Assessing fit of alternative unidimensional polytomous IRT models using posterior predictive model checking.
Li T; Xie C; Jiao H
Psychol Methods; 2017 Jun; 22(2):397-408. PubMed ID: 27243448
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Using the Stan Program for Bayesian Item Response Theory.
Luo Y; Jiao H
Educ Psychol Meas; 2018 Jun; 78(3):384-408. PubMed ID: 30140099
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Multivariate Higher-Order IRT Model and MCMC Algorithm for Linking Individual Participant Data From Multiple Studies.
Mun EY; Huo Y; White HR; Suzuki S; de la Torre J
Front Psychol; 2019; 10():1328. PubMed ID: 31244727
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Using SAS PROC MCMC for Item Response Theory Models.
Ames AJ; Samonte K
Educ Psychol Meas; 2015 Aug; 75(4):585-609. PubMed ID: 29795834
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Multilevel IRT using dichotomous and polytomous response data.
Fox JP
Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2005 May; 58(Pt 1):145-72. PubMed ID: 15969844
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. The Hellinger Distance within Posterior Predictive Assessment for Investigating Multidimensionality in IRT Models.
Matteucci M; Mignani S
Multivariate Behav Res; 2021; 56(4):627-648. PubMed ID: 32310003
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Comparison between pystan and numpyro in Bayesian item response theory: evaluation of agreement of estimated latent parameters and sampling performance.
Nishio M; Ota E; Matsuo H; Matsunaga T; Miyazaki A; Murakami T
PeerJ Comput Sci; 2023; 9():e1620. PubMed ID: 37869462
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. A Multilevel Higher Order Item Response Theory Model for Measuring Latent Growth in Longitudinal Data.
Huang HY
Appl Psychol Meas; 2015 Jul; 39(5):362-372. PubMed ID: 29881013
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Bayesian Dimensionality Assessment for the Multidimensional Nominal Response Model.
Revuelta J; Ximénez C
Front Psychol; 2017; 8():961. PubMed ID: 28670291
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Practical Consequences of Item Response Theory Model Misfit in the Context of Test Equating with Mixed-Format Test Data.
Zhao Y; Hambleton RK
Front Psychol; 2017; 8():484. PubMed ID: 28421011
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Inferring Latent Structure in Polytomous Data with a Higher-Order Diagnostic Model.
Culpepper SA; Balamuta JJ
Multivariate Behav Res; 2023; 58(2):368-386. PubMed ID: 34699299
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. A Posterior Predictive Model Checking Method Assuming Posterior Normality for Item Response Theory.
Kuhfeld M
Appl Psychol Meas; 2019 Mar; 43(2):125-142. PubMed ID: 30792560
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. A Bayesian Random Block Item Response Theory Model for Forced-Choice Formats.
Lee H; Smith WZ
Educ Psychol Meas; 2020 Jun; 80(3):578-603. PubMed ID: 32425220
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Using SAS PROC NLMIXED to fit item response theory models.
Sheu CF; Chen CT; Su YH; Wang WC
Behav Res Methods; 2005 May; 37(2):202-18. PubMed ID: 16171193
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Psychometric properties for the Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding: dichotomous versus polytomous conventional and IRT scoring.
Vispoel WP; Kim HY
Psychol Assess; 2014 Sep; 26(3):878-91. PubMed ID: 24708082
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Multiple-choice tests: polytomous IRT models misestimate item information.
García-Pérez MA
Span J Psychol; 2014 Dec; 17():E88. PubMed ID: 26054359
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Sample Size Requirements for Applying Mixed Polytomous Item Response Models: Results of a Monte Carlo Simulation Study.
Kutscher T; Eid M; Crayen C
Front Psychol; 2019; 10():2494. PubMed ID: 31798490
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. A Bayesian Robust IRT Outlier-Detection Model.
Öztürk NK; Karabatsos G
Appl Psychol Meas; 2017 May; 41(3):195-208. PubMed ID: 29881088
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Estimating Optimal Weights for Compound Scores: A Multidimensional IRT Approach.
van Lier HG; Siemons L; van der Laar MAFJ; Glas CAW
Multivariate Behav Res; 2018; 53(6):914-924. PubMed ID: 30463444
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
