File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Balancing fit and parsimony to improve Q‐matrix validation

TitleBalancing fit and parsimony to improve Q‐matrix validation
Authors
Issue Date2021
PublisherThe British Psychological Society. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.bps.org.uk/publications/jMS_1.cfm
Citation
British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 2021, v. 74 n. suppl. 1, p. 110-130 How to Cite?
AbstractThe Q-matrix identifies the subset of attributes measured by each item in the cognitive diagnosis modelling framework. Usually constructed by domain experts, the Q-matrix might contain some misspecifications, disrupting classification accuracy. Empirical Q-matrix validation methods such as the general discrimination index (GDI) and Wald have shown promising results in addressing this problem. However, a cut-off point is used in both methods, which might be suboptimal. To address this limitation, the Hull method is proposed and evaluated in the present study. This method aims to find the optimal balance between fit and parsimony, and it is flexible enough to be used either with a measure of item discrimination (the proportion of variance accounted for, PVAF) or a coefficient of determination (pseudo-R2). Results from a simulation study showed that the Hull method consistently showed the best performance and shortest computation time, especially when used with the PVAF. The Wald method also performed very well overall, while the GDI method obtained poor results when the number of attributes was high. The absence of a cut-off point provides greater flexibility to the Hull method, and it places it as a comprehensive solution to the Q-matrix specification problem in applied settings. This proposal is illustrated using real data.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/305927
ISSN
2023 Impact Factor: 1.5
2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.735
ISI Accession Number ID

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorNájera, P-
dc.contributor.authorSorrel, MA-
dc.contributor.authorde la Torre, J-
dc.contributor.authorAbad, FJ-
dc.date.accessioned2021-10-20T10:16:19Z-
dc.date.available2021-10-20T10:16:19Z-
dc.date.issued2021-
dc.identifier.citationBritish Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 2021, v. 74 n. suppl. 1, p. 110-130-
dc.identifier.issn0007-1102-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/305927-
dc.description.abstractThe Q-matrix identifies the subset of attributes measured by each item in the cognitive diagnosis modelling framework. Usually constructed by domain experts, the Q-matrix might contain some misspecifications, disrupting classification accuracy. Empirical Q-matrix validation methods such as the general discrimination index (GDI) and Wald have shown promising results in addressing this problem. However, a cut-off point is used in both methods, which might be suboptimal. To address this limitation, the Hull method is proposed and evaluated in the present study. This method aims to find the optimal balance between fit and parsimony, and it is flexible enough to be used either with a measure of item discrimination (the proportion of variance accounted for, PVAF) or a coefficient of determination (pseudo-R2). Results from a simulation study showed that the Hull method consistently showed the best performance and shortest computation time, especially when used with the PVAF. The Wald method also performed very well overall, while the GDI method obtained poor results when the number of attributes was high. The absence of a cut-off point provides greater flexibility to the Hull method, and it places it as a comprehensive solution to the Q-matrix specification problem in applied settings. This proposal is illustrated using real data.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.publisherThe British Psychological Society. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.bps.org.uk/publications/jMS_1.cfm-
dc.relation.ispartofBritish Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology-
dc.rightsReproduced with permission from [journal name] © The British Psychological Society [year]-
dc.titleBalancing fit and parsimony to improve Q‐matrix validation-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.identifier.emailde la Torre, J: j.delatorre@hku.hk-
dc.identifier.authorityde la Torre, J=rp02159-
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/bmsp.12228-
dc.identifier.pmid33231301-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-85096695890-
dc.identifier.hkuros328189-
dc.identifier.volume74-
dc.identifier.issuesuppl. 1-
dc.identifier.spage110-
dc.identifier.epage130-
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000591670900001-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Kingdom-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats