Formulación y validación de un modelo logístico lineal para la tarea de adición y sustracción de fracciones y números mixtos

  1. Elosua Oliden, Paula
  2. López Jauregui, Alicia
Revista:
Psicothema

ISSN: 0214-9915

Año de publicación: 2002

Volumen: 14

Número: 4

Páginas: 802-809

Tipo: Artículo

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAcceso abierto editor

Otras publicaciones en: Psicothema

Resumen

En este trabajo se analizan los componentes cognitivos implicados en la realización de una tarea matemática de rendimiento, concretamente la adición y sustracción de fracciones y números mixtos, mediante el modelo logístico lineal de Fisher (LLTM, 1973). La validación de la estructura cognitiva propuesta, reflejada en la matriz de pesos de los componentes, se lleva a cabo mediante el análisis QA (asignación cuadrática). Los resultados confirman que dicha matriz describe adecuadamente los componentes cognitivos requeridos para resolver los ítems del test.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Andersen, E.B. (1973). A goodness of fit test for the Rasch model. Psy chometrika, 38, 123-140.
  • Anderson, J.R. (1976). Language, Memory and Thought. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Baker, F.B. y Hubert, L.J. (1977). Inference procedures for ordering theory. Journal of Educational Statistics, 2(3), 217-233.
  • Borgatti, S.P., Everett, M.G. y Freeman, L.C. (1992). Ucinet IV Version 1.35. Columbia, SC: Analytic Technologies.
  • Butter, R. y De Boeck, P. (1998). An item response model with internal restrictions on item difficulty. Psychometrika, 63(1), 47-63.
  • Cliff, A.D. y Ord, J.K. (1981). Spatial processes: Models and aplications. London: Pion.
  • Embretson, S .E. (1983). Construct validity: construct representation versus nomothetic span. Psychological Bulletin, 93(1), 179-197.
  • Embretson, S.E. (1984). A General Latent Trait Model for response process. Psychometrika, 49(2), 175-186.
  • Embretson, S.E. (1985). Introduction to the problem of test design.En S.E. Embretson (Ed.), Test design: Developments in psychology and psychometrics. Orlando, Florida: Academic Press, Inc.
  • Embretson, S.E., y Wetzel, D. (1987). Component latent trait models for paragraph comprehension tests. Applied psychological measurement, 11, 175-193.
  • Embretson, S.E. (1991). A multidimensional latent trait model for measuring learning and change. Psychometrika, 56, 495-515.
  • Embretson, S.E. (1994). Aplications of Cognitive Design Systems to Test Development. En C.R. Reynolds (Ed.), Cognitive Assessment; A Multidisciplinary Perspective. N.York: Plenum Press.
  • Embretson, S.E. (1995a). A measurement model for linking individual learning to processes and knowledge: application to mathematical reasoning. Journal of educational measurement, 32(3) , 277-294.
  • Embretson, S.E. (1995b). The role of working memory capacity and general control processes in intelligence. Intelligence, 20, 169-189.
  • Embretson, S.E. (1999). Generating items during tests: Psychometric issues and models. Psychometrika, 64(4), 407-433.
  • Embretson, S.E. y Reise, S.P. (2000). IRT applications in cognitive and developmental assessment. En S.E. Embretson y S.P. Reise (Eds.), Item response theory for psychologists. London: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • English, L.D.H. y Halford, G.S. (1995). Mathematics Education. Models And Processes. Mahwah, New Jersey, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
  • Fisher, G.H. (1973). The linear logistic test model as an instrument in educational research. Acta psychologica, 37, 359-374.
  • Fisher, G.H. (1977). Linear logistic trait models: Theory and application. En H. Spada y W.F. Kempf (Eds.), Structural models of thinking and learning (pp. 203-225). Bern: Huber.
  • Fisher, G.H. (1983). Logistitc latent trait models with linear constraints. Psychometrika, 48, 3-26.
  • Fisher, G.H. (1995). The Linear Logistic Test Model. En G.H. Fisher e I. W. Molenaar (Eds.), Rasch models: Foundations, recent developments, and applications. New York: Springer-Verlag.
  • Fisher, G.H. y Ponocny-Seliger, E. (1998). Structural Rasch modeling: Handbook of the usage of LPCM-WIN 1.0. Groningen: ProGAMMA.
  • Frederiksen, N. , Mislevy, R. y Béjar, I.I. (1993 ). Test theory for a new generation of tests. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates , Inc.
  • Hambleton, R.K., Swaminathan, H. y Rogers, H.J. (1991). Fundamentals of item response theory: Sage Publications.
  • Hornke, L.F. y Habon, M.W. (1986). Rule-based item bank construction and evaluation within the linear logistic framework. Applied psychological measurement, 10(4), 369-380.
  • Hubert, L. y Schultz, J. (1976). Quadratic assignment as a general data analysis strategy. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 29, 190-241.
  • Hubert, L., Golledge, R.G., Costanzo, C.M., Gale, N. y Halperin, W.C. (1984). Nonparametric tests for directional data. En G. Bahrenberg, M.M. Fisher y Nijkamp (Eds.), Recent develpments in spatial data analysis (pp. 171-189). Brookfield VT: Brower.
  • Hubert, L.J. (1985). Combinatorial data analysis: Association and partial association. Psychometrika, 50(4), 449-467.
  • Maris, E.M. (1995). Psychometric latent response models. Psychometrika, 60(4), 523-547.
  • Medina Díaz, M. (1993). Analysis of cognitive structure using the linear logistic test model and quadratic assignment. Applied psychological measurement, 17(2), 117-130.
  • Mislevy, R.J. y Bock, R.D. (1990). BILOG 3: Item analysis and test sco ring with binary logistic models [Computer program]. Mooresville, IN: Scientific Software.
  • Mislevy, R.J. y Verhelst, N.D. (1990). Modeling item responses when different subjects employ different solution strategies. Psychometrika, 55, 195-215.
  • Nandakumar, R. y Stout, W. (1993). Refinements of Stout’s procedure for assessing latent trait unidimensionality. Journal of Educational Statistics, 18, 41-68.
  • Newell, A. y Simon, H.A. (1972). Human problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  • Pereda, L. (1975). Matemáticas. Desarrollos didácticos. Erein. Prieto, G. y Delgado, A.R. (2000). Utilidad y representación en la psicometría actual. Revista de Metodología de las Ciencias del Comporta miento, 2(2), 111-127.
  • Rasch, G. (1960). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attain ment tests. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
  • Real, E., Olea, J., Ponsoda, V., Revuelta, J. y Abad, F. J. (1999). Análisis de la dificultad de un test de matemáticas mediante un modelo componencial. Psicológica, 20, 121-134.
  • Revuelta, J. y Ponsoda, V. (1999). Generación automática de ítems. En J. Olea, V. Ponsoda y G. Prieto (Eds.), Tests adaptativos Informatizados: Fundamentos y aplicaciones. Madrid: Pirámide.
  • Rost, J. (1990). Rasch models in latent classes: An integration of two approaches to item analysis. Applied Psychological Measurement, 14(3), 271-282.
  • Simon, H.A. (1978). Information - processing tehory of human problem solving. En W.K. Estes (Ed.), Handbook of learning and cognitive processes (Vol. 5, pp. 271-295). Hillsdale, N. J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Smith, R.M., Kramer, G.A. y Kubiak, A.T. (1992). Components of difficulty in spatial ability test items,Objective Measurement: Theory into Practice, Vol. 1 (pp. 157-174).
  • Spada, H. y May, R. (1982). The linear logistic test model and its application in educational research. En D. Spearrit (Ed.), The improvement of measurement in Education and Psychology (pp. 67-84). Hawthorne, Victoria: Australian council for educational research.
  • Spada, H. y McGaw, B. (1985). The assesment of learning effects with linear logistic test models. En S. Embretson (Ed.), Test design: developments in psychology and psychometrics . Orlando, Florida: Academic Press, Inc.
  • Stout, W.F. (1987). A nonparametric approach for assessing latent trait unidimensionality. Psychometrika, 52, 589-617.
  • Suárez, J .C. y Martínez, R. (2000). Análisis del funcionamiento de índices de ajuste al item ante la violación del supuesto de curvas paralelas del modelo de Rasch. Revista de Metodología de las ciencias del comportamiento, 2(1), 49-62.
  • Tatsuoka, K.K. (1983). Rule space: An approach for dealing with misconceptions based on item response theory. Journal of Educational Measurement, 20, 345-354.
  • Tatsuoka, K.K., Birenbaum, M., Yamamoto, K. y Dowd, B. (1984). Analysis of errors in fraction addition and substraction problems (NIE-G-81- 0002). Urbana Champaign: University of Illinois.
  • Whitely, S.E. (1980). Multicomponent latent trait models for ability tests. Psychometrika, 45(4), 175-186.
  • Yamamoto, K. y Gitomer, D.H. (1993). Application of a HYBRID model to a test of cognitive skill representation. En N. Frederiksen, R. Mislevy e y I. Béjar (Eds.), Test theory for a new generation of tests (pp. 275- 295). Hillsdale, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet