Nonparametric or kernel regression estimation of item response curves (IRCs) is often used in item analysis in testing programs. These estimates are biased when the observed scores are used as the regressor because the observed scores are contaminated by measurement error. Accuracy of this estimation is a concern theoretically and operationally. This study investigates the deconvolution kernel estimation of IRCs, which corrects for the measurement error in the regressor variable. A comparison of the traditional kernel estimation and the deconvolution estimation of IRCs is carried out using both simulated and operational data. It is found that, in item analysis, the traditional kernel estimation is comparable to the deconvolution kernel estimation in capturing important features of the IRC.
CarrollR. J.MacaJ. D.RuppertD. (1999). Nonparametric regression in the presence of measurement error. Biometrika, 86, 541–554.
2.
CarrollR.RuppertD.StefanskiL.CrainiceanuC. (2006). Measurement error in nonlinear models: A modern perspective (2nd ed).
London: Chapman & Hall.
3.
CarrollR.StefanskiL. (1990). Approximate quasi-likelihood estimation in models with surrogate predictors. Journal of the American Statistical Association85, 652–663.
4.
DelaigleA.FanJ.CarrollR. (2009). A design-adaptive local polynomial estimator for the errors-in-variables problem. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 104, 348–359.
5.
DouglasJ. (1997). Joint consistency of nonparametric item characteristic curve and ability estimation. Psychometrika, 62, 7–28.
6.
DouglasJ.CohenA. S. (2001). Nonparametric item response function estimation for assessing parametric model fit. Applied Psychological Measurement, 25, 234–243.
7.
DurrettR. (1995). Probability: Theory and examples (2nd ed.).
New York, NY: Duxbury Press.
8.
FanJ.TroungY. (1993). Nonparametric regression with errors in variables. Annals of Statistics, 21, 1900–1925.
9.
GoldbergL. R.JohnsonJ. A.EberH. W.HoganR.AshtonM. C.CloningerC. R. (2006). The international personality item pool and the future of public-domain personality measures. Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 84–96.
10.
HaertelE. (2006). Reliability. In BrennanR. L. (Ed.), Educational measurement (4th ed. pp. 65110).
Westport, CT: Praeger.
11.
KolenM.ZengL.HansonB. (1996). Conditional standard errors of measurement for scale scores using IRT. Journal of Educational Measurement, 33, 129–140.
12.
LeeY. (2007). A comparison of methods for nonparametric estimation of item characteristic curves for binary items. Applied Psychological Measurement, 31, 121–134.
13.
LivingstonS.DoransN. (2004). A graphical approach to item analysis(ETS RR-04-10). Princeton, NJ: ETS.
14.
LordF. M. (1959). Tests of the same length do have the same standard error of measurement. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 19, 233–239.
15.
MacCannC.DuckworthA.RobertsR. (2009). Empirical identification of the major facets of conscientiousness. Learning and Individual Differences, 19, 451–458.
16.
MeijerR.BanekeJ. (2004). Analyzing psychopathology items: A case for nonparametric item response theory modeling. Psychological Methods, 9, 354–368.
RuppertD.SheatherS. J.WandM. P. (1995). An effective bandwidth selector for local least squares regression. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 90, 1257–1270.
20.
SijtsmaK. (1998). Methodology review: Nonparametric IRT approaches to the analysis of dichotomours item scores. Applied Psychological Measurement, 22, 3–31.
21.
SilvermanB. (1986). Density estimation for statistics and data analysis. London: Chapman & Hall.
22.
SteinE.WeissG. (1971). Introduction to Fourier analysis on Euclidean spaces. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
23.
WandM. (1998). Finite sample performance of deconvolving density estimators. Statistics & Probability Letters, 37, 131–139.
