KnowledgeTrend Research Network
KnowledgeTrend JournalFunding & Careers
KnowledgeTrend
☰ Menu
HomePapersResearchersResearch LabsProjectsGroupsFunding & CareersScholarshipsBlogJournalTools
Sign inCreate account
Psychometric Methodologies and Testing, Language Development and Disorders, Advanced Statistical Modeling Techniques

Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items

Journal of Memory and Language · 2008

RR. Harald Baayen·DDouglas Davidson·DDouglas M. Bates
0 KT citations82 views0 saves0 references

Abstract

Abstract metadata is not available.

Research topics

Advanced Statistical Modeling TechniquesLanguage Development and DisordersPsychometric Methodologies and Testing
Full text

Read the research paper

PDF provided by the publishing journal.

View PDFDownload PDF
Continue discovering

Related research

Coefficient Alpha and the Internal Structure of Tests

A general formula ( α ) of which a special case is the Kuder-Richardson coefficient of equivalence is shown to be the mean of all split-half coefficients resulting from different splittings of a test. α is therefore an estimate of the correlation between two random samples of items from a universe of items like those in the test. α is found to be an appropriate index of equivalence and, except for very short tests, of the first-factor concentration in the test. Tests divisible into distinct subtests should be so divided before using the formula. The index \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document} $$\bar r_{ij} $$ \end{document} , derived from α , is shown to be an index of inter-item homogeneity. Comparison is made to the Guttman and Loevinger approaches. Parallel split coefficients are shown to be unnecessary for tests of common types. In designing tests, maximum interpretability of scores is obtained by increasing the first-factor concentration in any separately-scored subtest and avoiding substantial group-factor clusters within a subtest. Scalability is not a requisite.

Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach.

In this article, we provide guidance for substantive researchers on the use of structural equation modeling in practice for theory testing and development. We present a comprehensive, two-step modeling approach that employs a series of nested models and sequential chi-square difference tests. We discuss the comparative advantages of this approach over a one-step approach. Considerations in specification, assessment of fit, and respecification of measurement models using confirmatory factor analysis are reviewed. As background to the two-step approach, the distinction between exploratory and confirmatory analysis, the distinction between complementary approaches for theory testing versus predictive application, and some developments in estimation methods also are discussed.