Graded Responses and Joining Categories: A Rejoinder to Andrich' “Models For Measurement, Precision, and Nondichotomization of Graded Responses”
- 1 March 1995
- journal article
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP) in Psychometrika
- Vol. 60 (1) , 27-35
- https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02294427
Abstract
Andrich (1995) claims that the “probability distribution [of graded responses] reflects the precision with which the data are collected” (p. 7), and that an “increase in precision of responses [ . . . ] destroys the joining assumption” (p. 22). He stressed “that Jansen and Roskam simply asserted this equivalence [of the joining assumption and ξ-invariance], and did not derive it.” However, Jansen and Roskam (1986) and Roskam and Jansen (1989)—in the sequel referred to as JR—have neither asserted an equivalence between ξ-invariance and the joining assumption, nor defined ξ-invariance such that it could be considered in terms of estimation.Keywords
This publication has 8 references indexed in Scilit:
- Models for Measurement, Precision, and the Nondichotomization of Graded ResponsesPsychometrika, 1995
- Local Homogeneity in Latent Trait Models. A Characterization of the Homogeneous Monotone IRT ModelPsychometrika, 1993
- On the Sampling Theory Roundations of Item Response Theory ModelsPsychometrika, 1990
- Conditions for Rasch-Dichotomizability of the Unidimensional Polytomous Rasch ModelPsychometrika, 1989
- A Rasch Model for Continuous RatingsPsychometrika, 1987
- Latent Trait Models and Dichotomization of Graded ResponsesPsychometrika, 1986
- Normal Ogive Model on the Continuous Response Level in the Multidimensional Latent SpacePsychometrika, 1974
- Homogeneous Case of the Continuous Response ModelPsychometrika, 1973