English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 113648/144635 (79%)
Visitors : 51662141      Online Users : 479
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/98185


    Title: 評等量尺之Rasch分析
    Other Titles: Rasch Analysis of Rating Scale Data
    Authors: 施慶麟 ; 王文中
    Keywords: 試題反應理論 ; 固定效果模式 ; 隨機效果模式 ; 主觀判斷
    Item response theory ; Fixed-effects model ; Random-effects model ;Subjective judgment
    Date: 2006-06
    Issue Date: 2016-06-21 17:07:52 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 社會科學常會使用評等量尺。在試題反應理論的架構中,評等量尺模式(rating scale model, [RSM]; Andrich, 1978)頗常被用來分析這種資料。該模式假設所有題目的閾參數都是一樣的,且其效果對所有受試者也是固定的。不過由於評等量尺通常需要受試者做出主觀的判斷,而該判斷通常會因人而異,因此該項固定效果的假設不易吻合。新近發展的隨機效果評等量尺模式(random-effects rating scale model, [RE-RSM]; Wang & Wilson, 2004),將閾參數改為隨機效果,因此比較能反映出評等量尺中主觀判斷的隨機特性。 本研究透過三個實際的評等量尺資料,比較並說明幾種常用於分析評等量尺的模式,包括RSM,部分得分模式(partial credit model; Masters, 1982)、混合評等量尺模式(mixed rating scale model; von Davier & Rost, 1995),RE-RSM,以及限制性的隨機效果部分得分模式(constrained random-effects partial credit model; Wang & Wilson),並展示如何利用這些模式診斷試題品質,探討隨機效果的大小與可能成因,以提供試題編製與修訂時的參考。
    Rating scales have been widely used in social sciences. Within the framework of item response theory, the rating scale model (RSM; Andrich, 1978) is commonly used to fit rating scale data. In the RSM, the threshold difficulty is assumed to be constant across items and persons. However, rating scales usually require persons to make subjective judgments, which are likely to vary across persons. Therefore, the assumption of fixed-effects may not hold. In this study, we introduce the recently developed random-effects rating scale model (RE-RSM; Wang & Wilson, 2004) in which the threshold parameters are treated as random-effects rather than fixed-effects in order to better reflect the random nature of subjective judgments in responding rating scales. Through empirical analyses of three rating scale data sets, we describe and compare several models for rating scale data, including the RSM, the partial credit model (Masters, 1982), the mixed rating scale model (von Davier & Rost, 1995), the RE-RSM, and the constrained random-effects partial credit model (Wang & Wilson). We also demonstrate how to use these models to diagnose item quality, to explore the magnitudes and possible causes of randomness in subjective judgments, and to provide some suggestions for item writing and revision.
    Relation: 教育與心理研究, 29(2) ,399-421
    Journal of Education & Psychology
    Data Type: article
    Appears in Collections:[教育與心理研究 TSSCI] 期刊論文

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    index.html0KbHTML2358View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏,無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用,惟仍請適度,合理使用本網站之內容,以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用,則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

    2.本網站之製作,已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益,如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者,請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw),維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback