Factor Analysis for Nominal (First Choice) Data

References

• Agresti, A. (2002). Categorical data analysis (2nd ed). New York, NY: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Akaike, H. (1974). A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 19, 716–723. doi:10.1109/TAC.1974.1100705
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Birnbaum, A. (1968). Some latent trait models and their use in inferring an examinee’s ability. In F. M. Lord & M. R. Novick (Eds.), Statistical theories of mental test scores (pp. 397–479). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• Bock, R. D. (1972). Estimating item parameters and latent ability when responses are scored in two or more nominal categories. Psychometrika, 37, 29–51. doi:10.1007/BF02291411
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bock, R. D. (1997). The nominal categories model. In W. J. van der Linden & R. K. Hambleton (Eds.), Handbook of modern item response theory (pp. 33–49). New York, NY: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Bock, R. D., & Aitkin, M. (1981). Marginal maximum likelihood estimation of item parameters: Application of an EM algorithm. Psychometrika, 46, 443–459. doi:10.1007/BF02293801
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bock, R. D., & Mislevy, R. J. (1982). Adaptive EAP estimation of ability in a microcomputer environment. Applied Psychological Measurement, 6, 431–444. doi:10.1177/014662168200600405
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Böckenholt, U. (2004). Comparative judgments as an alternative to ratings: Identifying the scale origin. Psychological Methods, 9, 453–465. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.9.4.453
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York, NY: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Bolt, D. M., & Newton, J. R. (2011). Multiscale measurement of extreme response style. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 71, 814–833. doi:10.1177/0013164410388411
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown, A., & Maydeu-Olivares, A. (2011). Item response modeling of forced-choice questionnaires. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 71, 460–502. doi:10.1177/0013164410375112
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown, A., & Maydeu-Olivares, A. (2012). Fitting a Thurstonian IRT model to forced-choice data using Mplus. Behavior Research Methods, 44, 1135–1147. doi:10.3758/s13428-012-0217-x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown, T. A. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Browne, M. W. (2001). An overview of analytic rotation in exploratory factor analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 36, 111–150. doi:10.1207/S15327906MBR3601_05
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cai, L. (2010a). A two-tier full-information item factor analysis model with applications. Psychometrika, 75, 581–612. doi:10.1007/s11336-010-9178-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cai, L. (2010b). Metropolis-Hastings Robbins-Monro algorithm for confirmatory item factor analysis. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 35, 307–335. doi:10.3102/1076998609353115
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cai, L. (2015). flexMIRT: A numerical engine for multilevel item factor analysis and test scoring [Computer program]. Chapel Hill, NC: Vector Psychometric Group.
   Google Scholar
• Cai, L., & Thissen, D. (2015). Modern approaches to parameter estimation in item response theory. In S. P. Reise & D. A. Revicki (Eds.), Handbook of item response theory modeling: Applications to typical performance assessment (pp. 41–59). New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Cai, L., du Toit, S. H. C., & Thissen, D. (2011). IRTPRO: Flexible, multidimensional, multiple categorical IRT modelling [Computer software]. Chicago, IL: Scientific Software International.
   Google Scholar
• Campion, M. C., & Ployhart, R. E. (2013). Assessing personality with situational judgment measures: Interactionist psychology operationalized. In N. D. Christiansen, & R. P. Tett (Eds.), Handbook of personality at work (pp. 439–456). New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Chalmers, R. P. (2012). mirt: A multidimensional item response theory package for the R environment. Journal of Statistical Software, 48, 1–29. doi:10.18637/jss.v048.i06
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cudeck, R., & MacCallum, R. C. (2007). Factor analysis at 100: Historical developments and future directions. Factor analysis at 100 years. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. doi:10.1207/S15327906MBR3803_06
   Google Scholar
• Falk, C. F., & Cai, L. (2016). A flexible full-information approach to the modeling of response styles. Psychological Methods, 21, 328–347. doi:10.1037/met0000059
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferrando, P. J., & Lorenzo-Seva, U. (2016). A note on improving EAP trait estimation in oblique factor-analytic and item response theory models. Psicológica, 37, 235–247. Retrieved from https://www.uv.es/revispsi/articulos2.16/7Ferrando.pdf
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fischer, G. H., & Molenaar, I. W. (1995). Rasch models: Foundations, recent developments and applications. New York, NY: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Haberman, S. J. (1977). Log-linear models and frequency tables with small expected cell counts. Annals of Statistics, 5, 1148–1169. doi:10.1214/aos/1176344001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Houts, C. R., & Cai, L. (2016). flexMIRT: Flexible multilevel item factor analysis and test scoring user’s manual. Seattle, WA: Vector Psychometric Group.
   Google Scholar
• Huggins-Manley, A. C., & Algina, J. (2015). The partial credit model and generalized partial credit model as constrained nominal response models, with applications in Mplus. Structural Equation Modeling, 22, 1–11. doi:10.1080/10705511.2014.937374
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson, T. R., & Bolt, D. M. (2010). On the use of factor-analytic multinomial logit item response models to account for individual differences in response style. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 35, 92–114. doi:10.3102/1076998609340529
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jöreskog, K. G., & Moustaki, I. (2001). Factor analysis of ordinal variables: A comparison of three approaches. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 36, 347–387. Retrieved from http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1207/S15327906347-387
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jöreskog, K. G., & Moustaki, I. (2006). Factor analysis of ordinal variables with full information maximum likelihood. Retrieved from http://www.ssicentral.com/lisrel/techdocs/orfiml.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Masters, G. N. (1982). A Rasch model for partial credit scoring. Psychometrika, 47, 149–174. doi:10.1007/BF02296272
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maydeu-Olivares, A. (2005). Further empirical results on parametric versus non-parametric IRT modeling of Likert-type personality data. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 40, 261–279. doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr4002_5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maydeu-Olivares, A., & Böckenholt, U. (2009). Modeling preference data. In A. Millsap & R. Maydeu-Olivares (Eds.), Handbook of quantitative methods in psychology (pp. 264–282). London, UK: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Maydeu-Olivares, A., & Böckenholt, U. (2005). Structural equation modeling of paired-comparison and ranking data. Psychological Methods, 10, 285–304. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.10.3.285
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maydeu-Olivares, A., & Brown, A. (2010). Item response modeling of paired comparison and ranking data. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 45, 935–974. doi:10.1080/00273171.2010.531231
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maydeu-Olivares, A., & Cai, L. (2006). A cautionary note on using G 2 (dif) to assess relative model fit in categorical data analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 41, 55–64. doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr4101_4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maydeu-Olivares, A., & Joe, H. (2014). Assessing approximate fit in categorical data analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 49, 305–328. doi:10.1080/00273171.2014.911075
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McDonald, R. P. (1985). Factor analysis and related methods. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• McDonald, R. P. (1997). Normal ogive multidimensional model. In W. J. van der Linden & R. K. Hambleton (Eds.), Handbook of modern item response theory (pp. 257–269). New York, NY: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Muraki, E. (1992). A generalized partial credit model: Application of an EM algorithm. Applied Psychological Measurement, 16, 159–176. doi:10.1177/014662169201600206
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muthén, B. (1984). A general structural equation model with dichotomous, ordered categorical, and continuous latent variable indicators. Psychometrika, 49, 115–132. doi:10.1007/BF02294210
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muthén, B., & Asparouhov, T. (2012). Bayesian structural equation modeling: A more flexible representation of substantive theory. Psychological Methods, 17, 313–335. doi:10.1037/a0026802
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2016). Mplus. Version 7.2 [Computer program]. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
   Google Scholar
• Ployhart, R. E., & Ward, A. (2013). Situational judgment measures. In K. F. Geisinger, B. A. Bracken, J. F. Carlson, J.-I. C. Hansen, N. R. Kuncel, S. P. Reise, & M. C. Rodriguez (Eds.), APA handbook of testing and assessment in psychology, Vol. 1: Test theory and testing and assessment in industrial and organizational psychology. (pp. 551–564). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/14047-030
   Google Scholar
• Preston, K., Reise, S., Cai, L., & Hays, R. D. (2011). Using the nominal response model to evaluate response category discrimination in the PROMIS emotional distress item pools. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 71, 523–550. doi:10.1177/0013164410382250
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Revuelta, J. (2008). The generalized logit-linear item response model for binary-designed items. Psychometrika, 73, 385–405. doi:10.1007/s11336-007-9048-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Revuelta, J. (2010). Estimating difficulty from polytomous categorical data. Psychometrika, 75, 331–350. doi:10.1007/s11336-009-9145-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Revuelta, J. (2014). Multidimensional item response model for nominal variables. Applied Psychological Measurement, 38, 549–562. doi:10.1177/0146621614536272
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Revuelta, J., & Ximénez, C. (2017). Bayesian dimensionality assessment for the multidimensional nominal response model. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 961. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00961
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Samejima, F. (1969). Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores. Psychometric Monograph No. 17.
   Google Scholar
• Schilling, S., & Bock, R. D. (2005). High-dimensional maximum marginal likelihood item factor analysis by adaptive quadrature. Psychometrika, 70, 533–555. doi:10.1007/s11336-003-1141-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwarz, G. (1978). Estimating the dimension of a model. The Annals of Statistics, 6, 461–464. doi:10.1214/aos/1176344136
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smithson, M., & Merkle, E. C. (2013). Generalized linear models for categorical and continuous limited dependent variables. New York, NY: Chapman and Hall.
   Google Scholar
• St-Sauveur, C., Girouard, S., & Goyette, V. (2014). Use of situational judgment tests in personnel selection: Are the different methods for scoring the response options equivalent? International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 22, 225–239. doi:10.1111/ijsa.12072
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Takane, Y., & de Leeuw, J. (1987). On the relationship between item response theory and factor analysis of discretized variables. Psychometrika, 52, 393–408. doi:10.1007/BF02294363
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thissen, D., Cai, L., & Bock, R. D. (2010). The nominal categories item response model. In M. L. Nering & R. Ostini (Eds.), Handbook of polytomous item response theory models (pp. 43–75). Abingdon, VA: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9780203861264.ch3
   Google Scholar
• Thissen, D., & Cai, L. (2019). Nominal categories model. In W. J. van der Linden (Ed.), Handbook of item response theory modeling, volume one: Models (pp. 54–73). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
   Google Scholar
• Thissen, D., Chen, W. H., & Bock, R. D. (2003). Multilog (version 7) [Computer program]. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International.
   Google Scholar
• Thissen, D., Steinberg, L., & Fitzpatrick, A. R. (1989). Multiple-choice models: The distractors are also part of the item. Journal of Educational Measurement, 26, 161–176. doi:10.1111/j.1745-3984.1989.tb00326.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thissen, D., & Wainer, H. (2001). Test scoring. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• van der Linden, W. J. (2019). Handbook of item response theory. Volume one: Models. New York, NY: Chapman and Hall, CRC. ISBN: 9780367220013
   Google Scholar
• Vermunt, J. K., & Magidson, J. (2016). TechnicalGuide for latent GOLD 5.1: Basic, advanced, and syntax. Belmont, MA: Statistical Innovations Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Whetzel, D. L., & McDaniel, M. A. (2016). Are situational judgment tests the best way to measure personality in high stakes testing? In U. Kumar (Ed.), The Wiley handbook of personality assessment (pp. 205–214). New York, NY: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Wollack, J. A., Bolt, D. M., Cohen, A. S., & Lee, Y.-S. (2002). Recovery of item parameters in the nominal response model: A comparison of marginal maximum likelihood estimation and Markov Chain Monte Carlo estimation. Applied Psychological Measurement, 26, 339–352. doi:10.1177/0146621602026003007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar