本文選題：項目反映理論 + 項目功能差異��； 參考：《江西師范大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：本研究嘗試對IRT取向下的三種方法：SIBTEST、IRT-LR和DFIT，設(shè)置三種模式：標(biāo)準(zhǔn)程序下（Standard模式，簡稱ST），加入Scale Purification程序的檢測模式（簡稱SP模式）和加入DIF-free-then-DIF策略的檢測模式（簡稱pure anchor，簡稱PA,），進而形成九種檢測程序（SIB-ST，SIB-SP，SIB-PA，IRT-LR-ST,IRT-LR-SP、IRT-LR-PA、DFIT-ST，DFIT-SP，和DFIT-PA），在等級反應(yīng)模式下以模擬實驗方式，探討三種模式和九種檢測程序的檢測效果比較。 研究設(shè)計采用四個自變量（樣本容量，DIF形態(tài)，DIF百分比以及DIF強度），因變量兩個（I型錯誤率和統(tǒng)計檢驗力）。 研究主要結(jié)論摘要如下： 一、在不同樣本容量下，九種程序的統(tǒng)計檢驗力都是是隨著樣本容量增大而逐步提高的，平均統(tǒng)計檢驗力和平均I型錯誤率亦如此。SP和PA檢測模式的統(tǒng)計檢驗力分布與ST檢測模式的分布基本相似，但I型錯誤率控制為較低。 二、對于不同強度DIF檢測，除了非一致性DIF題，一致性和混合型DIF的檢測方面，各種程序?qū)τ趶姸葹橹卸龋?.6）的DIF題目檢測效果都優(yōu)于兩種輕度DIF題目的。 三、對于不同DIF比例（10%，20%，30%），9種程序的統(tǒng)計檢驗力和I型錯誤率隨著DIF比例增加而提高。 四，整體統(tǒng)計檢驗力而言，IRT LR法三種檢測模式的DIF檢測效果相對于其他方法較佳。DFIT次之，SIBTEST隨后。 五、不同檢測模式而言，在低DIF比例和小樣本時，ST模式統(tǒng)計檢驗力較好，而在高DIF比例和大樣本時，，SP模式和PA模式表現(xiàn)較為接近，比ST模式要更好一些。SP和PA檢測模式對控制I型錯誤率有積極作用。
[Abstract]:In this study, we try to set up three modes: standard program, standard program, IRT-LR and DFIT. for three methods:: SIBTESTT IRT-LR and DFIT. In short, the detection mode of joining Scale Purification program (SP mode) and the detection mode of adding DIF-free-then-DIF strategy (pure anchorm), and then forming nine detection programs SIB-STN SIB-SPN IRT-LR-STN IRT-LR-SPN IRT-LR-PADFIT-STDFIT-SPP, and DFIT-PAPX, and DFIT-PACU, in the hierarchical response mode. This paper discusses the comparison of the detection effects between the three modes and the nine detection programs. The design was designed with four independent variables (sample size, DIF form, DIF percentage and DIF strength), two dependent variables, type I error rate and statistical test power. The main findings of the study are summarized as follows: First, under different sample sizes, the statistical test power of the nine programs increases gradually with the increase of sample size. The distribution of statistical test power of the model of SP and PA is similar to that of the model of St detection, but the control of type I error rate is lower. Secondly, for DIF detection with different intensities, in addition to non-consistency DIF problem, consistency and mixed DIF detection, all kinds of programs are superior to two mild DIF problems for DIF subject detection with moderate strength of 0.6). Third, the statistical test power and type I error rate of 9 programs for different DIF ratios increase with the increase of DIF ratio. 4. The overall statistical test power of IRT / LR method was better than that of other methods in DIF detection, followed by SIBTEST. Fifthly, the statistical test power of St model is better in low DIF ratio and small sample, while in high DIF ratio and large sample, SP model and PA model are close to each other. Better than St mode. Sp and PA detection mode have positive effect on controlling type I error rate.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：江西師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：B841

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前2條

1 余嘉元;項目反應(yīng)理論研究中的計算機模擬方法[J];心理科學(xué);1991年02期

2 曹亦薇,張厚粲;漢語詞匯測驗中的項目功能差異初探[J];心理學(xué)報;1999年04期

本文編號：1866858