Estimating ability parameters in latent trait models in general, and in the Rasch model in particular is almost always hampered by noise in the data. This noise can be caused by guessing, inattention to easy questions, and other factors which are unrelated to ability. In this study several alternative formulations which attempt to deal with these problems without a reparameterization are tested through a Monte Carlo simulation. It was found that although no one of the tested schemes is uniformly superior to all others, a modified jackknife stood out as the best one in general, it was also super efficient (more efficient than the asymptotically optimal estimator) for tests with forty or fewer items. It is proposed that this sort of jackknifing scheme for estimating ability be considered for practical work.

On-line item generation is becoming increasingly feasible for many cognitive tests. Item generation seemingly conflicts with the well established principle of measuring persons from items with known psychometric properties. This paper examines psychometric principles and models required for measurement from on-line item generation. Three psychometric issues are elaborated for item generation. First, design principles to generate items are considered. A cognitive design system approach is elaborated and then illustrated with an application to a test of abstract reasoning. Second, psychometric models for calibrating generating principles, rather than specific items, are required. Existing item response theory (IRT) models are reviewed and a new IRT model that includes the impact on item discrimination, as well as difficulty, is developed. Third, the impact of item parameter uncertainty on person estimates is considered. Results from both fixed content and adaptive testing are presented.

This paper focuses on the computation of asymptotic standard errors (ASE) of ability estimators with dichotomous item response models. A general framework is considered, and ability estimators are defined from a very restricted set of assumptions and formulas. This approach encompasses most standard methods such as maximum likelihood, weighted likelihood, maximum a posteriori, and robust estimators. A general formula for the ASE is derived from the theory of M-estimation. Well-known results are found back as particular cases for the maximum and robust estimators, while new ASE proposals for the weighted likelihood and maximum a posteriori estimators are presented. These new formulas are compared to traditional ones by means of a simulation study under Rasch modeling.

It has long been part of the item response theory (IRT) folklore that under the usual empirical Bayes unidimensional IRT modeling approach, the posterior distribution of examinee ability given test response is approximately normal for a long test. Under very general and nonrestrictive nonparametric assumptions, we make this claim rigorous for a broad class of latent models.

Accurate assessment of a student’s ability is the key task of a test. Assessments based on final responses are the standard. As the infrastructure advances, substantially more information is observed. One of such instances is the process data that is collected by computer-based interactive items and contain a student’s detailed interactive processes. In this paper, we show both theoretically and with simulated and empirical data that appropriately including such information in the assessment will substantially improve relevant assessment precision.

Five different ability estimators—maximum likelihood [MLE (θ)], weighted likelihood [WLE (θ)], Bayesian modal [BME (θ)], expected a posteriori [EAP (θ)] and the standardized number-right score [Z (θ)]—were used as scores for conventional, multiple-choice tests. The bias, standard error and reliability of the five ability estimators were evaluated using Monte Carlo estimates of the unknown conditional means and variances of the estimators. The results indicated that ability estimates based on BME (θ), EAP (θ) or WLE (θ) were reasonably unbiased for the range of abilities corresponding to the difficulty of a test, and that their standard errors were relatively small. Also, they were as reliable as the old standby—the number-right score.

Rationale and the actual procedures of two nonparametric approaches, called Bivariate P.D.F. Approach and Conditional P.D.F. Approach, for estimating the operating characteristic of a discrete item response, or the conditional probability, given latent trait, that the examinee's response be that specific response, are introduced and discussed. These methods are featured by the facts that: (a) estimation is made without assuming any mathematical forms, and (b) it is based upon a relatively small sample of several hundred to a few thousand examinees.

Some examples of the results obtained by the Simple Sum Procedure and the Differential Weight Procedure of the Conditional P.D.F. Approach are given, using simulated data. The usefulness of these nonparametric methods is also discussed.

Additional information contained in incorrect responses calls for a multicategorical rather than a binary analysis of multiple choice data. A nonparametric divided-by-total model for joint maximum likelihood estimation of probability-of-choice functions (for particular responses) and of latent ability is proposed. The model approximates probability functions by rational splines. Some illustrative examples of real test data analysis and the results of a Monte Carlo study are presented.

The conventional method of measuring ability, which is based on items with assumed true parameter values obtained from a pretest, is compared to a Bayesian method that deals with the uncertainties of such items. Computational expressions are presented for approximating the posterior mean and variance of ability under the three-parameter logistic (3PL) model. A 1987 American College Testing Program (ACT) math test is used to demonstrate that the standard practice of using maximum likelihood or empirical Bayes techniques may seriously underestimate the uncertainty in estimated ability when the pretest sample is only moderately large.

The test information function serves important roles in latent trait models and in their applications. Among others, it has been used as the measure of accuracy in ability estimation. A question arises, however, if the test information function is accurate enough for all meaningful levels of ability relative to the test, especially when the number of test items is relatively small (e.g., less than 50). In the present paper, using the constant information model and constant amounts of test information for a finite interval of ability, simulated data were produced for eight different levels of ability and for twenty different numbers of test items ranging between 10 and 200. Analyses of these data suggest that it is desirable to consider some modification of the test information function when it is used as the measure of accuracy in ability estimation.

The asymptotic posterior normality (APN) of the latent variable vector in an item response theory (IRT) model is a crucial argument in IRT modeling approaches. In case of a single latent trait and under general assumptions, Chang and Stout (Psychometrika, 58(1):37–52, 1993) proved the APN for a broad class of latent trait models for binary items. Under the same setup, they also showed the consistency of the latent trait’s maximum likelihood estimator (MLE). Since then, several modeling approaches have been developed that consider multivariate latent traits and assume their APN, a conjecture which has not been proved so far. We fill this theoretical gap by extending the results of Chang and Stout for multivariate latent traits. Further, we discuss the existence and consistency of MLEs, maximum a-posteriori and expected a-posteriori estimators for the latent traits under the same broad class of latent trait models.