The fit of cognitive diagnostic models (CDMs) to response data needs to be evaluated, since CDMs might yield misleading results when they do not fit the data well. Limited-information statistic M2 and the associated root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA2) in item factor analysis were extended to evaluate the fit of CDMs. The findings suggested that the M2 statistic has proper empirical Type I error rates and good statistical power, and it could be used as a general statistical tool. More importantly, we found that there was a strong linear relationship between mean marginal misclassification rates and RMSEA2 when there was model–data misfit. The evidence demonstrated that .030 and .045 could be reasonable thresholds for excellent and good fit, respectively, under the saturated log-linear cognitive diagnosis model.

Bishop, Y. M., Fienberg, S. E., Holland, P. W. (2007). Discrete multivariate analysis: Theory and practice. New York, NY: Springer.
Google Scholar
Bock, R. D., Gibbons, R., Muraki, E. (1988). Full-information item factor analysis. Applied Psychological Measurement, 12, 261280.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals
Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York, NY: Guilford.
Google Scholar
Browne, M. W. (1984). Asymptotically distribution-free methods for the analysis of covariance structures. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 37, 6283.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
Browne, M. W., Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In Bollen, K. A., Long, J. S. (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Google Scholar
Cai, L. (2013). flexMIRT® version 2: Flexible multilevel multidimensional item analysis and test scoring [Computer software]. Chapel Hill, NC: Vector Psychometric Group.
Google Scholar
Cai, L., Hansen, M. (2013). Limited-information goodness-of-fit testing of hierarchical item factor models. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 66, 245276.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
Cai, L., Maydeu-Olivares, A., Coffman, D. L., Thissen, D. (2006). Limited-information goodness-of-fit testing of item response theory models for sparse 2P tables. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 59, 173194.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
Chen, J., de la Torre, J., Zhang, Z. (2013). Relative and absolute fit evaluation in cognitive diagnosis modeling. Journal of Educational Measurement, 50, 123140.
Google Scholar | Crossref
DeCarlo, L. T. (2010). On the analysis of fraction subtraction data: The DINA model, classification, latent class sizes, and the Q-matrix. Applied Psychological Measurement, 35, 826.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals
de la Torre, J. (2009). DINA model and parameter estimation: A didactic. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 34, 115130.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals
de la Torre, J. (2011). The generalized DINA model framework. Psychometrika, 76, 179199.
Google Scholar | Crossref
de la Torre, J., Douglas, J. A. (2008). Model evaluation and multiple strategies in cognitive diagnosis: An analysis of fraction subtraction data. Psychometrika, 73, 595624.
Google Scholar | Crossref
de la Torre, J., Lee, Y.-S. (2013). Evaluating the Wald test for item-level comparison of saturated and reduced models in cognitive diagnosis. Journal of Educational Measurement, 50, 355373.
Google Scholar | Crossref
Hartz, S. M. (2002). A Bayesian framework for the unified model for assessing cognitive abilities: Blending theory with practicality (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Department of Statistics, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign.
Google Scholar
Henson, R. A., Templin, J. L., Willse, J. T. (2009). Defining a family of cognitive diagnosis models using log-linear models with latent variables. Psychometrika, 74, 191210.
Google Scholar | Crossref
Hu, L., Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3, 424453.
Google Scholar | Crossref
Junker, B. W., Sijtsma, K. (2001). Cognitive assessment models with few assumptions, and connections with nonparametric item response theory. Applied Psychological Measurement, 25, 258272.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals
Jurich, D. P. (2014). Assessing model fit of multidimensional item response theory and diagnostic classification models using limited-information statistics (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Department of Graduate Psychology, James Madison University, Harrisonburg.
Google Scholar
Khatri, C. G. (1966). A note on a MANOVA model applied to problems in growth curve. Annals of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics, 18, 7586.
Google Scholar | Crossref
Koehler, K. J., Larntz, K. (1980). An empirical investigation of goodness-of-fit statistics for sparse multinomials. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 75, 336344.
Google Scholar | Crossref
Kunina-Habenicht, O., Rupp, A. A., Wilhelm, O. (2012). The impact of model misspecification on parameter estimation and item-fit assessment in log-linear diagnostic classification models. Journal of Educational Measurement, 49, 5981.
Google Scholar | Crossref
Liu, Y., Maydeu-Olivares, A. (2014). Identifying the source of misfit in item response theory models. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 49, 354371.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
Maydeu-Olivares, A. (2013). Goodness-of-fit assessment of item response theory models. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 11, 71101.
Google Scholar | Crossref
Maydeu-Olivares, A., Joe, H. (2005). Limited- and full-information estimation and goodness-of-fit testing in 2n contingency tables: A unified framework. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 100, 10091020.
Google Scholar | Crossref
Maydeu-Olivares, A., Joe, H. (2014). Assessing approximate fit in categorical data analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 49, 305328.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
Mislevy, R. J. (1986). Bayes modal estimation in item response models. Psychometrika, 51, 177195.
Google Scholar | Crossref
Muthén, L. K., Muthén, B. O. (2012). Mplus user’s guide (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Author.
Google Scholar
R Core Team . (2014). R: A language and environment for statistical computing [Computer software]. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
Google Scholar
Reiser, M. (1996). Analysis of residuals for the multionmial item response model. Psychometrika, 61, 509528.
Google Scholar | Crossref
Reiser, M., Lin, Y. (1999). A goodness-of-fit test for the latent class model when expected frequencies are small. Sociological Methodology, 29, 81111.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals
Robitzsch, A., Kiefer, T., George, A. C., Uenlue, A. (2015). CDM: Cognitive diagnostic modeling [Computer software]. Retrieved from http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=CDM (R package version 4.2-12)
Google Scholar
Rupp, A. A., Templin, J. (2008). The effects of Q-matrix misspecification on parameter estimates and classification accuracy in the DINA Model. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 68, 7896.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals
Rupp, A. A., Templin, J., Henson, R. A. (2010). Diagnostic measurement: Theory, methods, and applications. New York, NY: Guilford.
Google Scholar
Sinharay, S. (2006). Model diagnostics for Bayesian networks. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 31, 133.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals
Sinharay, S., Almond, R. G. (2007). Assessing fit of cognitive diagnostic models a case study. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 67, 239257.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals
Sinharay, S., Puhan, G., Haberman, S. J. (2011). An NCME instructional module on subscores. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 30, 2940.
Google Scholar | Crossref
Tatsuoka, K. K. (1990). Toward an integration of item-response theory and cognitive error diagnosis. In Frederiksen, N., Glaser, R., Lesgold, A., Safto, M. (Eds.), Monitoring Skills and Knowledge Acquisition (pp. 453488). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Google Scholar
Templin, J. L., Henson, R. A. (2006). Measurement of psychological disorders using cognitive diagnosis models. Psychological methods, 11, 287305.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline
Access Options

My Account

Welcome
You do not have access to this content.



Chinese Institutions / 中国用户

Click the button below for the full-text content

请点击以下获取该全文

Institutional Access

does not have access to this content.

Purchase Content

24 hours online access to download content

Research off-campus without worrying about access issues. Find out about Lean Library here

Your Access Options


Purchase

JEB-article-ppv for $37.50

Cookies Notification

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Find out more.
Top