A Comparison of the Efficiency and Accuracy of BILOG and LOGIST
- 1 March 1987
- journal article
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP) in Psychometrika
- Vol. 52 (2) , 275-291
- https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02294241
Abstract
Comparisons are made between BILOG version 2.2 and LOGIST 5.0 Version 2.5 in estimating the item parameters, traits, item characteristic functions (ICFs), and test characteristic functions (TCFs) for the three-parameter logistic model. Data analyzed are simulated item responses for 1000 simulees and one 10-item test, four 20-item tests, and four 40-item tests. LOGIST usually was faster than BILOG in producing maximum likelihood estimates. BILOG almost always produced more accurate estimates of individual item parameters. In estimating ICFs and TCFs BILOG was more accurate for the 10-item test, and the two programs were about equally accurate for the 20- and 40-item tests.Keywords
This publication has 12 references indexed in Scilit:
- Estimating Latent DistributionsPsychometrika, 1984
- Statistical Bias in Maximum Likelihood Estimators of Item ParametersPsychometrika, 1983
- Tau-Equivalence and Equipercentile EquatingPsychometrika, 1983
- Unbiased Estimators of Ability Parameters, of their Variance, and of their Parallel-Forms ReliabilityPsychometrika, 1983
- Developing a Common Metric in Item Response TheoryApplied Psychological Measurement, 1983
- Recovery of Two- and Three-Parameter Logistic Item Characteristic Curves: A Monte Carlo StudyApplied Psychological Measurement, 1982
- Marginal Maximum Likelihood Estimation of Item Parameters: Application of an EM AlgorithmPsychometrika, 1981
- The ‘Ability’ Scale in Item Characteristic Curve TheoryPsychometrika, 1975
- Estimation of Latent Ability and Item Parameters when there are Omitted ResponsesPsychometrika, 1974
- Estimating True-Score Distributions in Psychological Testing (an Empirical Bayes Estimation Problem)Psychometrika, 1969