Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35146596›Full record

ArticlePsychometrika2022

Item Complexity: A Neglected Psychometric Feature of Test Items?

Daniel M Bolt, Xiangyi Liao

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Psychometrika, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Retrospective self-reports of sensitivity to the effects of alcohol: Trait-like stability and concomitant changes with alcohol involvement.Psychology of addictive behaviors : journal of the Society of Psychologists in Addictive Behaviors · 2024
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Daniel M BoltDepartment of Educational Psychology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, 1025 W. Johnson, Room 859, Madison, WI-, 53706, USA. dmbolt@wisc.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-7593-4439
Xiangyi LiaoDepartment of Educational Psychology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, 1025 W. Johnson, Room 859, Madison, WI-, 53706, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite its frequent consideration in test development, item complexity receives little attention in the psychometric modeling of item response data. In this address, I consider how variability in item complexity can be expected to emerge in the form of item characteristic curve (ICC) asymmetry, and how such effects may significantly influence applications of item response theory, especially those that assume interval-level properties of the latent proficiency metric and groups that vary substantially in mean proficiency. One application is the score gain deceleration phenomenon often observed in vertical scaling contexts, especially in subject areas like math or second language acquisition. It is demonstrated how the application of symmetric IRT models in the presence of complexity-induced positive ICC asymmetry can be a likely cause. A second application concerns the positive correlation between DIF and difficulty commonly seen in verbal proficiency (and other subject area) tests where problem-solving complexity is minimal and proficiency-related guessing effects are likely pronounced. Here we suggest negative ICC asymmetry as a probable cause and apply sensitivity analyses to demonstrate the ease with which such correlations disappear when allowing for negative ICC asymmetry. Unfortunately, the presence of systematic forms of ICC asymmetry is easily missed due to the considerable flexibility afforded by latent trait metrics in IRT. Speculation is provided regarding other applications for which attending to ICC asymmetry may prove useful.

Indexed as

Problem SolvingPsychometricsSurveys and QuestionnairesItem complexityItem response theory

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.