An IRT–Multiple Indicators Multiple Causes (MIMIC) Approach as a Method of Examining Item Response Latency
The analysis of response time has received increasing attention during the last decades, since evidence from several studies supported the argument that there is a direct relationship between item response time and test performance. The aim of this study was to investigate whether item response late...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2018-11-01
|
| Series: | Frontiers in Psychology |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02177/full |
| _version_ | 1811315499207753728 |
|---|---|
| author | Ioannis Tsaousis Georgios D. Sideridis Georgios D. Sideridis Abdullah Al-Sadaawi Abdullah Al-Sadaawi |
| author_facet | Ioannis Tsaousis Georgios D. Sideridis Georgios D. Sideridis Abdullah Al-Sadaawi Abdullah Al-Sadaawi |
| author_sort | Ioannis Tsaousis |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | The analysis of response time has received increasing attention during the last decades, since evidence from several studies supported the argument that there is a direct relationship between item response time and test performance. The aim of this study was to investigate whether item response latency affects person's ability parameters, in that it represents an adaptive or maladaptive practice. To examine the above research question data from 8,475 individuals completing the computerized version of the Postgraduate General Aptitude Test (PAGAT) were analyzed. To determine the extent to which response latency affects person's ability, we used a Multiple Indicators Multiple Causes (MIMIC) model, in which every item in a scale was linked to its corresponding covariate (i.e., item response latency). We ran the MIMIC model within the Item Response Theory (IRT) framework (2-PL model). The results supported the hypothesis that item response latency could provide valuable information for getting more accurate estimations for persons' ability levels. Results indicated that for individuals who invest more time on easy items, their likelihood of success does not improve, most likely because slow and fast responders have significantly different levels of ability (fast responders are of higher ability compared to slow responders). Consequently, investing more time for low ability individuals does not prove to be adaptive. The opposite was found for difficult items: individuals spending more time on difficult items increase their likelihood of success, more likely because they are high achievers (in difficult items individuals who spent more time were of significantly higher ability compared to fast responders). Thus, it appears that there is an interaction between the difficulty of the item and person abilities that explain the effects of response time on likelihood of success. We concluded that accommodating item response latency in a computerized assessment model, can inform test quality and test takers' behavior, and in that way, enhance score measurement accuracy. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-13T11:31:20Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-ee892f4df87c4a348544e9b7494f70f4 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1664-1078 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-13T11:31:20Z |
| publishDate | 2018-11-01 |
| publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Frontiers in Psychology |
| spelling | doaj.art-ee892f4df87c4a348544e9b7494f70f42022-12-22T02:48:34ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Psychology1664-10782018-11-01910.3389/fpsyg.2018.02177375304An IRT–Multiple Indicators Multiple Causes (MIMIC) Approach as a Method of Examining Item Response LatencyIoannis Tsaousis0Georgios D. Sideridis1Georgios D. Sideridis2Abdullah Al-Sadaawi3Abdullah Al-Sadaawi4Department of Psychology, University of Crete, Rethymno, GreeceInstitutional Centers for Clinical and Translational Research, Boston Children's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United StatesDepartment of Primary Education, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, GreecePsychology Department, College of Education, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi ArabiaNational Center for Assessment, Riyadh, Saudi ArabiaThe analysis of response time has received increasing attention during the last decades, since evidence from several studies supported the argument that there is a direct relationship between item response time and test performance. The aim of this study was to investigate whether item response latency affects person's ability parameters, in that it represents an adaptive or maladaptive practice. To examine the above research question data from 8,475 individuals completing the computerized version of the Postgraduate General Aptitude Test (PAGAT) were analyzed. To determine the extent to which response latency affects person's ability, we used a Multiple Indicators Multiple Causes (MIMIC) model, in which every item in a scale was linked to its corresponding covariate (i.e., item response latency). We ran the MIMIC model within the Item Response Theory (IRT) framework (2-PL model). The results supported the hypothesis that item response latency could provide valuable information for getting more accurate estimations for persons' ability levels. Results indicated that for individuals who invest more time on easy items, their likelihood of success does not improve, most likely because slow and fast responders have significantly different levels of ability (fast responders are of higher ability compared to slow responders). Consequently, investing more time for low ability individuals does not prove to be adaptive. The opposite was found for difficult items: individuals spending more time on difficult items increase their likelihood of success, more likely because they are high achievers (in difficult items individuals who spent more time were of significantly higher ability compared to fast responders). Thus, it appears that there is an interaction between the difficulty of the item and person abilities that explain the effects of response time on likelihood of success. We concluded that accommodating item response latency in a computerized assessment model, can inform test quality and test takers' behavior, and in that way, enhance score measurement accuracy.https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02177/fullitem response latencycomputer based testing (CBT)educational testingmultiple indicator multiple causes model (MIMIC)IRT-MIMIC |
| spellingShingle | Ioannis Tsaousis Georgios D. Sideridis Georgios D. Sideridis Abdullah Al-Sadaawi Abdullah Al-Sadaawi An IRT–Multiple Indicators Multiple Causes (MIMIC) Approach as a Method of Examining Item Response Latency Frontiers in Psychology item response latency computer based testing (CBT) educational testing multiple indicator multiple causes model (MIMIC) IRT-MIMIC |
| title | An IRT–Multiple Indicators Multiple Causes (MIMIC) Approach as a Method of Examining Item Response Latency |
| title_full | An IRT–Multiple Indicators Multiple Causes (MIMIC) Approach as a Method of Examining Item Response Latency |
| title_fullStr | An IRT–Multiple Indicators Multiple Causes (MIMIC) Approach as a Method of Examining Item Response Latency |
| title_full_unstemmed | An IRT–Multiple Indicators Multiple Causes (MIMIC) Approach as a Method of Examining Item Response Latency |
| title_short | An IRT–Multiple Indicators Multiple Causes (MIMIC) Approach as a Method of Examining Item Response Latency |
| title_sort | irt multiple indicators multiple causes mimic approach as a method of examining item response latency |
| topic | item response latency computer based testing (CBT) educational testing multiple indicator multiple causes model (MIMIC) IRT-MIMIC |
| url | https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02177/full |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT ioannistsaousis anirtmultipleindicatorsmultiplecausesmimicapproachasamethodofexaminingitemresponselatency AT georgiosdsideridis anirtmultipleindicatorsmultiplecausesmimicapproachasamethodofexaminingitemresponselatency AT georgiosdsideridis anirtmultipleindicatorsmultiplecausesmimicapproachasamethodofexaminingitemresponselatency AT abdullahalsadaawi anirtmultipleindicatorsmultiplecausesmimicapproachasamethodofexaminingitemresponselatency AT abdullahalsadaawi anirtmultipleindicatorsmultiplecausesmimicapproachasamethodofexaminingitemresponselatency AT ioannistsaousis irtmultipleindicatorsmultiplecausesmimicapproachasamethodofexaminingitemresponselatency AT georgiosdsideridis irtmultipleindicatorsmultiplecausesmimicapproachasamethodofexaminingitemresponselatency AT georgiosdsideridis irtmultipleindicatorsmultiplecausesmimicapproachasamethodofexaminingitemresponselatency AT abdullahalsadaawi irtmultipleindicatorsmultiplecausesmimicapproachasamethodofexaminingitemresponselatency AT abdullahalsadaawi irtmultipleindicatorsmultiplecausesmimicapproachasamethodofexaminingitemresponselatency |