Applications of Mixture IRT Models: A Literature Review

References

• (References with an asterisk (*) indicate some of the studies included in the literature review)
   Google Scholar
• Akaike, H. (1974). A new look at the statistical model identification. Automatic Control, IEEE Transactions On, 19, 716–723. doi:10.1109/TAC.1974.1100705
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alexeev, N., Templin, J., & Cohen, A. S. (2011). Spurious latent classes in the mixture Rasch model. Journal of Educational Measurement, 48(3), 313–332. doi:10.1111/jedm.2011.48.issue-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Aryadoust, V. (2015). Fitting a mixture Rasch model to English as a foreign language listening tests: The role of cognitive and background variables in explaining latent differential item functioning. International Journal of Testing, 15(3), 216–238. doi:10.1080/15305058.2015.1004409
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Aryadoust, V., & Zhang, L. (2016). Fitting the mixed Rasch model to a reading comprehension test: Exploring individual difference profiles in L2 reading. Language Testing, 33(4), 529–553. doi:10.1177/0265532215594640
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Austin, E. J., Deary, I. J., & Egan, V. (2006). Individual differences in response scale use: Mixed Rasch modelling of responses to NEO-FFI items. Personality and Individual Differences, 40(6), 1235–1245. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2005.10.018
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Bacci, S., Bartolucci, F., Grilli, L., & Rampichini, C. (2017). Evaluation of student performance through a multidimensional finite mixture IRT model. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 52(6), 732–746. doi:10.1080/00273171.2017.1361803
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Bacci, S., & Gnaldi, M. (2015). A classification of university courses based on students’ satisfaction: An application of a two-level mixture item response model. Quality & Quantity, 49(3), 927–940. doi:10.1007/s11135-014-0101-0
   Google Scholar
• *Baghaei, P., & Carstensen, C. H. (2013). Fitting the mixed Rasch model to a reading comprehension test: Identifying reader types. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 18(5), 1–13.
   Google Scholar
• *Biswas-Diener, R., Vittersø, J., & Diener, E. (2010). The Danish effect: Beginning to explain high well-being in Denmark. Social Indicators Research, 97(2), 229–246. doi:10.1007/s11205-009-9499-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Bolt, D. M., Cohen, A. S., & Wollack, J. A. (2001). A mixture item response model for multiple-choice data. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 26, 381–409. doi:10.3102/10769986026004381
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Bolt, D. M., Cohen, A. S., & Wollack, J. A. (2002). Item parameter estimation under conditions of test speededness: Application of a mixture Rasch model with ordinal constraints. Journal of Educational Measurement, 39, 331–348. doi:10.1111/jedm.2002.39.issue-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bozdogan, H. (1987). Model selection and Akaike’s information criterion (AIC): The general theory and its analytical extensions. Psychometrika, 52(3), 345–370. doi:10.1007/BF02294361
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Büsch, D., & Strauss, B. (2005). Qualitative differences in performing coordination tasks. Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science, 9(3), 161–180. doi:10.1207/s15327841mpee0903_2
   Google Scholar
• *Carter, N. T., Dalal, D. K., Lake, C. J., Lin, B. C., & Zickar, M. J. (2011). Using mixed-model item response theory to analyze organizational survey responses: An illustration using the job descriptive index. Organizational Research Methods, 14(1), 116–146. doi:10.1177/1094428110363309
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Chen, Y. F., & Jiao, H. (2014). Exploring the utility of background and cognitive variables in explaining latent differential item functioning: An example of the PISA 2009 reading assessment. Educational Assessment, 19(2), 77–96. doi:10.1080/10627197.2014.903650
   Google Scholar
• *Cho, H. J., Lee, J., & Kingston, N. (2012). Examining the effectiveness of test accommodation using DIF and a mixture IRT model. Applied Measurement in Education, 25(4), 281–304. doi:10.1080/08957347.2012.714682
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Cho, S.-J., & Cohen, A. S. (2010). A multilevel mixture IRT model with an application to DIF. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 35, 336–370. doi:10.3102/1076998609353111
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Cho, S.-J., Cohen, A. S., & Bottge, B. (2013). Detecting intervention effects using a multilevel latent transition analysis with a mixture IRT model. Psychometrika, 78, 576–600. doi:10.1007/s11336-012-9314-0
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Cho, S.-J., Cohen, A. S., Kim, S.-H., & Bottge, B. (2010). Latent transition analysis with a mixture IRT measurement model. Applied Psychological Measurement, 34, 483–504. doi:10.1177/0146621610362978
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Cho, S.-J., Cohen, A. S., & Kim, S.-H. (2013). Markov chain Monte Carlo estimation of a mixture item response theory model. Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation, 83, 278–306. doi:10.1080/00949655.2011.603090
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cho, S. J., Suh, Y., & Lee, W. Y. (2016). An NCME instructional module on latent DIF analysis using mixture item response models. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 35(1), 48–61. doi:10.1111/emip.12093
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Choi, I. H., Paek, I., & Cho, S. J. (2017). *The impact of various class-distinction features on model selection in the mixture Rasch model. The Journal of Experimental Education, 85(3), 411–424. doi:10.1080/00220973.2016.1250208
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Choi, I.-H., & Wilson, M. (2015). Multidimensional classification of examinees using the mixture random weights linear logistic test model. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 75, 78–101. doi:10.1177/0013164414522124
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Choi, Y. J., Alexeev, N., & Cohen, A. S. (2015). Differential item functioning analysis using a mixture 3-parameter logistic model with a covariate on the TIMSS 2007 mathematics test. International Journal of Testing, 15(3), 239–253. doi:10.1080/15305058.2015.1007241
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Chow, J. K. F., & Kennedy, K. J. (2012). Citizenship and governance in the Asian region: Insights from the international civic and citizenship education study. Public Organization Review, 12(3), 299–311. doi:10.1007/s11115-012-0189-4
   Google Scholar
• *Cohen, A. S., & Bolt, D. M. (2005). A mixture model analysis of differential item functioning. Journal of Educational Measurement, 42, 133–148. doi:10.1111/jedm.2005.42.issue-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Cohen, A. S., Gregg, N., & Deng, M. (2005). The role of extended time and item content on a high‐stakes mathematics test. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 20(4), 225–233. doi:10.1111/ldrp.2005.20.issue-4
   Google Scholar
• Dai, Y. (2013). A mixture Rasch model with a covariate: A simulation study via Bayesian Markov chain Monte Carlo estimation. Applied Psychological Measurement, 37, 375–396. doi:10.1177/0146621612475076
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *De Ayala, R. J., & Santiago, S. Y. (2017). An introduction to mixture item response theory models. Journal of School Psychology, 60, 25–40. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2016.01.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *De Boeck, P., Cho, S.-J., & Wilson, M. (2011). Explanatory secondary dimension modeling of latent differential item functioning. Applied Psychological Measurement, 35, 583–603. doi:10.1177/0146621611428446
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Finch, H., & Pierson, E. (2011). A mixture IRT analysis of risky youth behavior. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 98. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00098
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Finch, W. H., & Finch, M. E. H. (2013). Investigation of specific learning disability and testing accommodations based differential item functioning using a multilevel multidimensional mixture item response theory model. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 73, 973–993. doi:10.1177/0013164413494776
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Finch, W. H., & French, B. F. (2012). Parameter estimation with mixture item response theory models: A Monte Carlo comparison of maximum likelihood and Bayesian methods. Journal of Modern Applied Statistical Methods, 11, 167–178. doi:10.22237/jmasm/1335845580
   Google Scholar
• *Freund, P. A., Tietjens, M., & Strauss, B. (2013). Using rating scales for the assessment of physical self-concept: Why the number of response categories matters. Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science, 17(4), 249–263. doi:10.1080/1091367X.2013.807265
   Google Scholar
• Frick, H., Strobl, C., Leisch, F., & Zeileis, A. (2012). Psychomix: Psychometric mixture models. R Package version, 1.
   Google Scholar
• *Frick, H., Strobl, C., & Zeileis, A. (2015). Rasch mixture models for DIF detection: A comparison of old and new score specifications. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 75(2), 208–234. doi:10.1177/0013164414536183
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Glück, J., Machat, R., Jirasko, M., & Rollett, B. (2002). Training-related changes in solution strategy in a spatial test: An application of item response models. Learning and Individual Differences, 13(1), 1–22. doi:10.1016/S1041-6080(01)00042-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Gnaldi, M., Bacci, S., & Bartolucci, F. (2016). A multilevel finite mixture item response model to cluster examinees and schools. Advances in Data Analysis and Classification, 10(1), 53–70. doi:10.1007/s11634-014-0196-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Gollini, I., & Murphy, T. B. (2014). Mixture of latent trait analyzers for model-based clustering of categorical data. Statistics and Computing, 24(4), 569–588. doi:10.1007/s11222-013-9389-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Gollwitzer, M., Eid, M., & Jürgensen, R. (2005). Response styles in the assessment of anger expression. Psychological Assessment, 17(1), 56–69.
   Google Scholar
• *Hailey, E., Callahan, C. M., Azano, A., & Moon, T. R. (2012). An evaluation of test speededness in an assessment for third-grade gifted students. Journal of Advanced Academics, 23(4), 292–304. doi:10.1177/1932202X12462575
   Google Scholar
• *Hernández, A., Drasgow, F., & González-Romá, V. (2004). Investigating the functioning of a middle category by means of a mixed-measurement model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(4), 687–699. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.89.4.687
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Hong, S., & Min, S.-Y. (2007). Mixed Rasch modeling of the self-rating depression scale incorporating latent class and Rasch rating scale models. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 67, 280–299. doi:10.1177/0013164406292072
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Huang, H. Y. (2017). Mixture IRT model with a higher-order structure for latent traits. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 77(2), 275–304. doi:10.1177/0013164416640327
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Jang, Y., Kim, S. H., & Cohen, A. S. (2018). The impact of multidimensionality on extraction of latent classes in mixture Rasch models. Journal of Educational Measurement, 55(3), 403–420. doi:10.1111/jedm.12185
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Jasper, F., Nater, U. M., Hiller, W., Ehlert, U., Fischer, S., & Witthöft, M. (2013). Rasch scalability of the somatosensory amplification scale: A mixture distribution approach. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 74(6), 469–478. doi:10.1016/j.jpsychores.2013.02.006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Jeon, M., & De Boeck, P. (2018). An analysis of an item-response strategy based on knowledge retrieval. Behavior Research Methods, 1–23. doi:10.3758/s13428-018-1064-1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Jiao, H., Lissitz, R. W., Macready, G., Wang, S., & Liang, S. (2011). Exploring levels of performance using the mixture Rasch model for standard setting. Psychological Test and Assessment Modeling, 53(4), 499–522.
   Google Scholar
• *Jilke, S., Meuleman, B., & Van de Walle, S. (2015). We need to compare, but how? Measurement equivalence in comparative public administration. Public Administration Review, 75(1), 36–48. doi:10.1111/puar.12318
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Kadengye, D. T., Ceulemans, E., & van Den Noortgate, W. (2014). A generalized longitudinal mixture IRT model for measuring differential growth in learning environments. Behavior Research Methods, 46, 823–840. doi:10.3758/s13428-014-0443-5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kelderman, H., & Macready, G. B. (1990). The use of loglinear models for assessing differential item functioning across manifest and latent examinee groups. Journal of Educational Measurement, 27(4), 307–327. doi:10.1111/jedm.1990.27.issue-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim, M., & Cohen, A. S. (2017, April). A random item testlet model for speededness in constructed response items. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, San Antonio, TX.
   Google Scholar
• Kim, S., Kwak, M., & Cohen, A. S. (2017). A mixture partial credit model analysis using language-based covariates. In L. A. van der Ark, S. Culpepper, J. A. Douglas, W.-C. Wang, & M. Wiberg (Eds.) Quantitative psychology: The 81st Annual Meeting of the Psychometric Society (pp. 321–333). New York: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• *Klein Entink, R. H., Fox, J. P., & van Den Hout, A. (2011). A mixture model for the joint analysis of latent developmental trajectories and survival. Statistics in Medicine, 30(18), 2310–2325. doi:10.1002/sim.4266
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Kutscher, T., Crayen, C., & Eid, M. (2017). Using a mixed IRT model to assess the scale usage in the measurement of job satisfaction. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1–13. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01998
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Li, F., Cohen, A. S., Kim, S.-H., & Cho, S.-J. (2009). Model selection methods for mixture dichotomous IRT models. Applied Psychological Measurement, 33, 353–373. doi:10.1177/0146621608326422
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, T., Jiao, H., & Macready, G. B. (2016). Different approaches to covariate inclusion in the mixture Rasch model. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 76(5), 848–872. doi:10.1177/0013164415610380
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Liu, H., Liu, Y., & Li, M. (2018). Analysis of process data of PISA 2012 computer-based problem solving: Application of the modified multilevel mixture IRT model. Frontiers in Psychology, 9. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01372
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lord, F. M., & Novick, M. R. (1968). Statistical theories of mental test scores. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• *Maij-de Meij, A. M., Kelderman, H., & van der Flier, H. (2008). Fitting a mixture item response theory model to personality questionnaire data: Characterizing latent classes and investigating possibilities for improving prediction. Applied Psychological Measurement, 32, 611–631. doi:10.1177/0146621607312613
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Maij-de Meij, A. M., Kelderman, H., & van der Flier, H. (2010). Improvement in detection of differential item functioning using a mixture item response theory model. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 45, 975–999. doi:10.1080/00273171.2010.533047
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McLachlan, G., & Peel, D. (2000). Finite mixture models. New York, NY: John Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• *Meyer, J. P. (2010). A mixture Rasch model with item response time components. Applied Psychological Measurement, 34, 521–538. doi:10.1177/0146621609355451
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mislevy, R. J., & Verhelst, N. (1990). Modeling item responses when different subjects employ different solution strategies. Psychometrika, 55, 195–215. doi:10.1007/BF02295283
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Mneimneh, Z. N., Heeringa, S. G., Tourangeau, R., & Elliott, M. R. (2014). Bridging psychometrics and survey methodology: Can mixed Rasch models identify socially desirable reporting behavior? Journal of Survey Statistics and Methodology, 2(3), 257-282.
   Google Scholar
• Muthén, B. O. (1989). Latent variable modeling in heterogeneous populations. Psychometrika, 54(4), 557–585. doi:10.1007/BF02296397
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998–2013). Mplus user’s guide. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
   Google Scholar
• Nylund, K. L., Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. O. (2007). Deciding on the number of classes in latent class analysis and growth mixture modeling: A Monte Carlo simulation study. Structural Equation Modeling, 14, 535–569. doi:10.1080/10705510701575396
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Oliveri, M. E., Ercikan, K., & Zumbo, B. (2013). Analysis of sources of latent class differential item functioning in international assessments. International Journal of Testing, 13(3), 272–293. doi:10.1080/15305058.2012.738266
   Google Scholar
• *Oliveri, M. E., & von Davier, M. (2011). Investigation of model fit and score scale comparability in international assessments. Psychological Test and Assessment Modeling, 53(3), 315–333.
   Google Scholar
• *Ölmez, İ. B., & Cohen, A. S. (2018). A mixture partial credit analysis of math anxiety. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, 5(4), 611–630. doi:10.21449/ijate.455175
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Orrill, C. H., & Cohen, A. S. (2016). Why defining the construct matters: An examination of teacher knowledge using different lenses on one assessment. The Mathematics Enthusiast, 13(1), 93–110.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Paek, I., & Cho, S. J. (2015). A note on parameter estimate comparability: Across latent classes in mixture IRT modeling. Applied Psychological Measurement, 39(2), 135-143.
   Google Scholar
• *Park, Y. S., Lee, Y. S., & Xing, K. (2016). Investigating the impact of item parameter drift for item response theory models with mixture distributions. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1–17. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Pishghadam, R., Baghaei, P., & Seyednozadi, Z. (2017). Introducing emotioncy as a potential source of test bias: A mixed Rasch modeling study. International Journal of Testing, 17(2), 127–140. doi:10.1080/15305058.2016.1183208
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Preinerstorfer, D. (2011). mRm: An R package for conditional maximum likelihood estimation in mixed Rasch models. Retrieved from: http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/mRm/index.html
   Google Scholar
• Preinerstorfer, D., & Formann, A. K. (2012). Parameter recovery and model selection in mixed Rasch models. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 65, 251–262. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8317.2011.02020.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Reise, S. P., & Gomel, J. N. (1995). Modeling qualitative variation within latent trait dimensions: Application of mixed-measurement to personality assessment. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 30(3), 341–358. doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr3003_3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R Core Team (2018). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. doi:http://www.R-project.org/.
   Google Scholar
• Rost, J. (1990). Rasch models in latent classes: An integration of two approaches to item analysis. Applied Psychological Measurement, 14, 271–282. doi:10.1177/014662169001400305
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Scarpati, S. E., Wells, C. S., Lewis, C., & Jirka, S. (2011). Accommodations and item-level analyses using mixture differential item functioning models. The Journal of Special Education, 45(1), 54–62. doi:10.1177/0022466909350224
   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
• Sclove, S. L. (1987). Application of model-selection criteria to some problems in multivariate analysis. Psychometrika, 52, 333–343. doi:10.1007/BF02294360
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Sen, S. (2016). Applying the mixed Rasch model to the Runco ideational behavior scale. Creativity Research Journal, 28(4), 426–434. doi:10.1080/10400419.2016.1229985
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Sen, S. (2018). Spurious latent class problem in the mixed Rasch model: A comparison of three maximum likelihood estimation methods under different ability distributions. International Journal of Testing, 18(1), 71–100. doi:10.1080/15305058.2017.1312408
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Sen, S., Cohen, A. S., & Kim, S. H. (2016). The impact of non-normality on extraction of spurious latent classes in mixture IRT models. Applied Psychological Measurement, 40(2), 98–113. doi:10.1177/0146621615605080
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Sen, S., Cohen, A. S., & Kim, S. H. (2018). Model selection for multilevel mixture Rasch models. Applied Psychological Measurement, 1–18. doi:10.1177/0146621618779990
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sessoms, J., & Henson, R. A. (2018). Applications of diagnostic classification models: A literature review and critical commentary. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 16(1), 1–17.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smit., J. A., Kelderman, H., & van der Flier, H. (1999). Collateral information and mixed Rasch models. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 4, 21–32.
   Google Scholar
• Smit, J. A., Kelderman, H., & van der Flier, H. (2000). The mixed Birnbaum model: Estimation using collateral information. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 5(4), 31–43.
   Google Scholar
• *Smit, J. A., Kelderman, H., & van der Flier, H. (2003). Latent trait latent class analysis of an Eysenck personality questionnaire. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 8(3), 23–50.
   Google Scholar
• Spiegelhalter, D., Thomas, A., & Best, N. (2000). WinBUGS (Version 1.3) [Computer software]. Cambridge, UK: MRC Biostatistics Unit, Institute of Public Health.
   Google Scholar
• *Tay, L., Diener, E., Drasgow, F., & Vermunt, J. K. (2011). Multilevel mixed-measurement IRT analysis: An explication and application to self-reported emotions across the world. Organizational Research Methods, 14(1), 177–207. doi:10.1177/1094428110372674
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Tay, L., Newman, D. A., & Vermunt, J. K. (2011). Using mixed-measurement item response theory with covariates (MM-IRT-C) to ascertain observed and unobserved measurement equivalence. Organizational Research Methods, 14(1), 147–176. doi:10.1177/1094428110366037
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Van Nijlen, D., & Janssen, R. (2011). Measuring mastery across grades: An application to spelling ability. Applied Measurement in Education, 24(4), 367–387. doi:10.1080/08957347.2011.607064
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Van Nijlen, D. V., & Janssen, R. (2015). Examinee non-effort on contextualized and non-contextualized mathematics items in large-scale assessments. Applied Measurement in Education, 28(1), 68–84. doi:10.1080/08957347.2014.973559
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Verheyen, S., & Storms, G. (2013). A mixture approach to vagueness and ambiguity. PloS one, 8(5), e63507. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0063507
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Verheyen, S., Voorspoels, W., & Storms, G. (2015). Inferring choice criteria with mixture IRT models: A demonstration using ad hoc and goal-derived categories. Judgment and Decision Making, 10, 97–114.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Vermunt, J. K. (2008). Multilevel latent variable modeling: An application in education testing. Austrian Journal of Statistics, 37(3&4), 285–299.
   Google Scholar
• Vermunt, J. K., & Magidson, J. (2005). Technical guide for latent GOLD 4.0: Basic and advanced. Belmont, MA: Statistical Innovations Inc.
   Google Scholar
• von Davier, M. (2001). WINMIRA2001 [Computer software]. St. Paul, MN: Assessment Systems Corporation.
   Google Scholar
• von Davier, M. (2005). mdltm: Software for the general diagnostic model and for estimating mixtures of multidimensional discrete latent traits models. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
   Google Scholar
• von Davier, M., Rost, R., & Carstensen, C. H. (2007). Introduction: Extending the Rasch model. In M. von Davier & C. H. Carstensen (Eds.), Multivariate and mixture distribution Rasch models: Extensions and applications (pp. 1–12). New York, NY: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• *von Davier, M., & Yamamoto, K. (2004). Partially observed mixtures of IRT models: An extension of the generalized partial-credit model. Applied Psychological Measurement, 28(6), 389–406. doi:10.1177/0146621604268734
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Willse, J. (2009). mixRasch: Mixture Rasch models with JMLE. Retrieved from http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/mixRasch/mixRasch.pdf
   Google Scholar
• *Willse, J. T. (2011). Mixture Rasch models with joint maximum likelihood estimation. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 71(1), 5–19. doi:10.1177/0013164410387335
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Wollack, J. A., Cohen, A. S., & Wells, C. S. (2003). A method for maintaining scale stability in the presence of test speededness. Journal of Educational Measurement, 40, 307–330. doi:10.1111/jedm.2003.40.issue-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Wu, P. C., & Huang, T. W. (2010). Person heterogeneity of the BDI-II-C and its effects on dimensionality and construct validity: Using mixture item response models. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 43(3), 155–167. doi:10.1177/0748175610384808
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Wyse, A. E. (2018). Analyzing job analysis data using mixture Rasch models. International Journal of Testing, 19(1), 52–73.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Yalçın, S. (2018). Data fit comparison of mixture item response theory models and traditional models. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, 5(2), 301–313. doi:10.21449/ijate.402806
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yüksel, S., Elhan, A. H., Gökmen, D., Küçükdeveci, A. A., & Kutlay, Ş. (2018). Analyzing differential item functioning of the Nottingham health profile by mixed Rasch model. Turkish Society of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 64(4), 300–307 doi:10.5606/tftrd.2018.2796
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Zhang, D., Orrill, C., & Campbell, T. (2015). Using the mixture Rasch model to explore knowledge resources students invoke in mathematic and science assessments. School Science and Mathematics, 115(7), 356–365. doi:10.1111/ssm.12135
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Zickar, M. J., Gibby, R. E., & Robie, C. (2004). Uncovering faking samples in applicant, incumbent, and experimental data sets: An application of mixed-model item response theory. Organizational Research Methods, 7(2), 168–190. doi:10.1177/1094428104263674
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar