This paper presents a noncompensatory latent trait model, the multicomponent latent trait model for diagnosis (MLTM-D), for cognitive diagnosis. In MLTM-D, a hierarchical relationship between components and attributes is specified to be applicable to permit diagnosis at two levels. MLTM-D is a generalization of the multicomponent latent trait model (MLTM; Whitely in Psychometrika, 45:479–494, 1980; Embretson in Psychometrika, 49:175–186, 1984) to be applicable to measures of broad traits, such as achievement tests, in which component structure varies between items. Conditions for model identification are described and marginal maximum likelihood estimators are presented, along with simulation data to demonstrate parameter recovery. To illustrate how MLTM-D can be used for diagnosis, an application to a large-scale test of mathematics achievement is presented. An advantage of MLTM-D for diagnosis is that it may be more applicable to large-scale assessments with more heterogeneous items than are latent class models.

In some popular test designs (including computerized adaptive testing and multistage testing), many item pairs are not administered to any test takers, which may result in some complications during dimensionality analyses. In this paper, a modified DETECT index is proposed in order to perform dimensionality analyses for response data from such designs. It is proven in this paper that under certain conditions, the modified DETECT can successfully find the dimensionality-based partition of items. Furthermore, the modified DETECT index is decomposed into two parts, which can serve as indices of the reliability of results from the DETECT procedure when response data are judged to be multidimensional. A simulation study shows that the modified DETECT can successfully recover the dimensional structure of response data under reasonable specifications. Finally, the modified DETECT procedure is applied to real response data from two-stage tests to demonstrate how to utilize these indices and interpret their values in dimensionality analyses.

The issue of measurement invariance commonly arises in factor-analytic contexts, with methods for assessment including likelihood ratio tests, Lagrange multiplier tests, and Wald tests. These tests all require advance definition of the number of groups, group membership, and offending model parameters. In this paper, we study tests of measurement invariance based on stochastic processes of casewise derivatives of the likelihood function. These tests can be viewed as generalizations of the Lagrange multiplier test, and they are especially useful for: (i) identifying subgroups of individuals that violate measurement invariance along a continuous auxiliary variable without prespecified thresholds, and (ii) identifying specific parameters impacted by measurement invariance violations. The tests are presented and illustrated in detail, including an application to a study of stereotype threat and simulations examining the tests’ abilities in controlled conditions.

Most dichotomous item response models share the assumption of latent monotonicity, which states that the probability of a positive response to an item is a nondecreasing function of a latent variable intended to be measured. Latent monotonicity cannot be evaluated directly, but it implies manifest monotonicity across a variety of observed scores, such as the restscore, a single item score, and in some cases the total score. In this study, we show that manifest monotonicity can be tested by means of the order-constrained statistical inference framework. We propose a procedure that uses this framework to determine whether manifest monotonicity should be rejected for specific items. This approach provides a likelihood ratio test for which the p-value can be approximated through simulation. A simulation study is presented that evaluates the Type I error rate and power of the test, and the procedure is applied to empirical data.

The common way to calculate confidence intervals for item response theory models is to assume that the standardized maximum likelihood estimator for the person parameter θ is normally distributed. However, this approximation is often inadequate for short and medium test lengths. As a result, the coverage probabilities fall below the given level of significance in many cases; and, therefore, the corresponding intervals are no longer confidence intervals in terms of the actual definition. In the present work, confidence intervals are defined more precisely by utilizing the relationship between confidence intervals and hypothesis testing. Two approaches to confidence interval construction are explored that are optimal with respect to criteria of smallness and consistency with the standard approach.

We investigate the performance of three statistics, R1, R2 (Glas in Psychometrika 53:525–546, 1988), and M2 (Maydeu-Olivares & Joe in J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 100:1009–1020, 2005, Psychometrika 71:713–732, 2006) to assess the overall fit of a one-parameter logistic model (1PL) estimated by (marginal) maximum likelihood (ML). R1 and R2 were specifically designed to target specific assumptions of Rasch models, whereas M2 is a general purpose test statistic. We report asymptotic power rates under some interesting violations of model assumptions (different item discrimination, presence of guessing, and multidimensionality) as well as empirical rejection rates for correctly specified models and some misspecified models. All three statistics were found to be more powerful than Pearson’s X2 against two- and three-parameter logistic alternatives (2PL and 3PL), and against multidimensional 1PL models. The results suggest that there is no clear advantage in using goodness-of-fit statistics specifically designed for Rasch-type models to test these models when marginal ML estimation is used.

Convergence of the expectation-maximization (EM) algorithm to a global optimum of the marginal log likelihood function for unconstrained latent variable models with categorical indicators is presented. The sufficient conditions under which global convergence of the EM algorithm is attainable are provided in an information-theoretic context by interpreting the EM algorithm as alternating minimization of the Kullback–Leibler divergence between two convex sets. It is shown that these conditions are satisfied by an unconstrained latent class model, yielding an optimal bound against which more highly constrained models may be compared.

Despite wide applications of both mediation models and missing data techniques, formal discussion of mediation analysis with missing data is still rare. We introduce and compare four approaches to dealing with missing data in mediation analysis including listwise deletion, pairwise deletion, multiple imputation (MI), and a two-stage maximum likelihood (TS-ML) method. An R package bmem is developed to implement the four methods for mediation analysis with missing data in the structural equation modeling framework, and two real examples are used to illustrate the application of the four methods. The four methods are evaluated and compared under MCAR, MAR, and MNAR missing data mechanisms through simulation studies. Both MI and TS-ML perform well for MCAR and MAR data regardless of the inclusion of auxiliary variables and for AV-MNAR data with auxiliary variables. Although listwise deletion and pairwise deletion have low power and large parameter estimation bias in many studied conditions, they may provide useful information for exploring missing mechanisms.