Abstract
Latent class models for cognitive diagnosis have been developed to classify examinees into one of the 2K attribute profiles arising from a K-dimensional vector of binary skill indicators. These models recognize that response patterns tend to deviate from the ideal responses that would arise if skills and items generated item responses through a purely deterministic conjunctive process. An alternative to employing these latent class models is to minimize the distance between observed item response patterns and ideal response patterns, in a nonparametric fashion that utilizes no stochastic terms for these deviations. Theorems are presented that show the consistency of this approach, when the true model is one of several common latent class models for cognitive diagnosis. Consistency of classification is independent of sample size, because no model parameters need to be estimated. Simultaneous consistency for a large group of subjects can also be shown given some conditions on how sample size and test length grow with one another.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ayers, E., Nugent, R., & Dean, N. (2008). Skill set profile clustering based on student capability vectors computed from online tutoring data. In: R.S.J.d. Baker, T. Barnes, & J.E. Beck (Eds.), Proceedings of the 1st international conference on education data mining, Montreal (pp. 218–225).
Barnes, T. (2010). Novel derivation and application of skill matrices: the q-matrix method. In Handbook on educational data mining (pp. 159–172). Boca Raton: CRC Press.
Chiu, C., & Douglas, J. (2013). A nonparametric approach to cognitive diagnosis by proximity to ideal response patterns. Journal of Classification, 30, 225–250.
Chiu, C., Douglas, J., & Li, X. (2009). Cluster analysis for cognitive diagnostic theory and applications. Psychometrika, 74, 633–665.
de la Torre, J. (2011). The generalized DINA model framework. Psychometrika, 76, 179–199.
Hartz, S., Roussos, L., Henson, R., & Templin, J. (2005). The Fusion Model for skill diagnosis: blending theory with practicality. Unpublished manuscript.
Henson, R., Templin, J., & Willse, J. (2009). Defining a family of cognitive diagnosis models using log-linear models with latent variables. Psychometrika, 74, 191–210.
Junker, B.W., & Sijtsma, K. (2001). Cognitive assessment models with few assumptions, and connections with nonparametric item response theory. Applied Psychological Measurement, 25, 258–272.
Macready, G.B., & Dayton, C.M. (1977). The use of probabilistic models in the assessment of mastery. Journal of Educational Statistics, 2, 99–120.
Maris, E. (1999). Estimating multiple classification latent class models. Psychometrika, 64, 187–212.
Park, Y., & Lee, Y. (2011). IERI monograph series: issues and methodologies in large-scale assessments: Vol. 4. Diagnostic cluster analysis of mathematics skills.
Roussos, L., Templin, J., & Henson, R. (2007). Skills diagnosis using IRT-based latent class models. Journal of Educational Measurement, 44(4), 293–311.
Rupp, A.A., & Templin, J.L. (2007). Unique characteristics of cognitive diagnosis models. In: The annual meeting of the National Council for Measurement in Education, Chicago, April 2007.
Tatsuoka, K. (1983). Rule-space: an approach for dealing with misconceptions based on item response theory. Journal of Educational Measurement, 20, 34–38.
Tatsuoka, K. (1985). A probabilistic model for diagnosing misconceptions in the pattern classification approach. Journal of Educational Statistics, 12, 55–73.
Tatsuoka, K. (1990). Architecture of knowledge structures and cognitive diagnosis: a statistical pattern classification approach. In: P. Nichols, S. Chipman, & R. Brennan (Eds.), Cognitively diagnostic assessments (pp. 327–359). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
Tatsuoka, K., & Tatsuoka, M. (1987). Bug distribution and pattern classification. Psychometrika, 52, 193–206.
von Davier, M. (2005). A general diagnostic model applied to language testing data (ETS Research Report RR-05-16). Princeton: Educational Testing Service.
Willse, J., Henson, R., & Templin, J. (2007). Using sum scores or IRT in place of cognitive diagnosis models: can existing or more familiar models do the job? Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education. Chicago, Illinois.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Wang, S., Douglas, J. Consistency of Nonparametric Classification in Cognitive Diagnosis. Psychometrika 80, 85–100 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-013-9372-y
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-013-9372-y