1. Comparison of Reliability Measures under Factor Analysis and Item Response Theory —Ying Cheng ， Ke-Hai Yuan ， and Cheng Liu Presented by Zhu Jinxin

2. Outline of the Presentation Introduction of four reliability coefficients: , , ,  and  The relationship among them Conclusion and discussion

3. Cronbach’s alpha One of the definitions is K is the number of components (items or testlets)  X 2 is the variance of the observed total test scores,  Yi 2 is the variance of component i for the current sample of persons.

4. Cronbach’s alpha’s feature It is most widely used Raw sum score is used  may underestimates reliability at population level, when the assumption of essential tau- equivalency is violated

5. about Tau-equivalency

7. In this case, the reliability is underestimated by  which is only a lower-bound estimate of the true reliability of scale when measures are congeneric.

8.  in congeneric measures in Single-factor model

9. Suppose we have m items

10.  in congeneric measures in Single-factor model Variance of true score Variance of unweighted composite score

11. feature of  1.It neglects that people with the same sum score can have completely deferent response patterns.  ≧  when

12.  in congeneric measures in Single-factor model ≧≧≧≧ when is  equal to  ?

13. Reliability in IRT The variance of the MLE is (approximately) given by the inverse of the information The variance of  is 1 in MLE, in which The study use information in a broader sense by equating it with the inverse of a variance even when the parameter estimate is not an MLE so

14.  from information perspective

15.  from information perspective

16.  from information perspective

17. Reliability in IRT With a single parameter, I, the information is defined as the negative expected value of the second derivative of the log likelihood function. The IRT models directly relate the discrete responses to an underlying latent factor. When q is normally distributed, the normal ogive IRT models are equivalent to the item factor analysis model.

18. Reliability in IRT For binary response Where id the response and Approximately

19. Reliability in IRT For binary response

20. Reliability in IRT For binary response The information is defined as the negative expected value of the second derivative of the log likelihood function: For each item For test

21. Reliability in IRT For binary response the reliability is and (the deduction is put in the appedix)

22. Reliability in IRT For response of ordered categories, supposing the continuous response to item j is discretized by g threshold. The information of jth item is given by

23. The relationship  ≧  ≧   It is expected that There is no dominant relationship between  (2) Simulation demonstrated that, as the number of response increase,  can exceed  in practice.

24. Conclusion Keep as many many response categories as possible and use ML factor score. However, after having a certain number of response options, it may not be worth adding more.

25. Discussion Only graded response (order categories) models is studied. (comparing to other types polytomous IRT models) Only unidimensional models are studied.

26. Thank you!