Page 364 - Invited Paper Session (IPS) - Volume 2
P. 364

IPS279 Rense Lange
                  Figure 1: Probability of Observing Ratings w= 0, 1, and 2 as Respondents’ Trait Levels
                              (T) Increase.



















                         It is possible to solve for the various parameters (see e.g., [3]), which
                  yields the equations (not shown here) that describe the probability of each
                  answer. For instance, Figure 1 (solid lines) describes Pijkw for a three-category
                  rating scale with step values F1 = -1.1 and F2 = 1.1, S = D = 0, with T varying
                  along the X-axis. Note that as T increases the lowest rating (i.e., w=0) becomes
                  less likely than the value w=1, which is then gradually superseded by the value
                  w=2. Note that w=0 and w=1 are equally likely to occur at T = F1 = -1.1 and
                  that w=1 and 2 occur with equal probability at T = F2 = 1.1.
                         The parameters combine additively in Equation 1, thereby facilitating
                  interpretation. For instance, if we had used a rater whose severity is 1 logit less
                  than the current rater (i.e., S = -1) then the probabilities are described by the
                  dotted lines in Figure 1, i.e., the curves shift to the left by 1 logit.
                         Estimation. The estimation of MFRS parameters traditionally relies on
                  a Joint Maximum Likelihood Estimation approach (JMLE) [2]. While JMLE is
                  satisfactory in a batch-oriented context, it is not suitable for an incremental
                  approach  where  model  parameter  estimates  may  be  needed  while  data  is
                  being  gathered.  In  JMLE  all  parameter  estimates  are  mutually  dependent
                  during estimation, as updating the trait parameters T requires D, S, and F,
                  updating D requires T, S, and F, etc. Thus, each update necessarily involves
                  several  passes  through  the  entire  dataset  and  over  200  iterations  may  be
                  required to reach convergence [4]. Accordingly, computational demands are
                  typically  dominated  by  T  (respondents’  traits  or  abilities)  as  this  is  almost
                  always the facet with the greatest number of levels.
                         PAIRS for Binary Items. To avoid JMLE’s computational demands we
                  instead use the PAIRS approach first proposed by Rasch [7], see [8]. To be sure,
                  PAIRS’  computational  demands  are  also  dominated  by  the  levels  of  T.
                  However, with some pre-processing many required computations can already
                  be performed during data gathering while new data are entered. With all pre-
                  processing completed, obtaining the final parameter estimates requires very

                                                                     351 | I S I   W S C   2 0 1 9
   359   360   361   362   363   364   365   366   367   368   369