内江师范学院学报
內江師範學院學報
내강사범학원학보
JOURNAL OF NEIJIANG TEACHERS COLLEGE
2014年
12期
52-56
,共5页
结构方程模型%等级反应模型%项目反应理论%人格量表%项目筛选
結構方程模型%等級反應模型%項目反應理論%人格量錶%項目篩選
결구방정모형%등급반응모형%항목반응이론%인격량표%항목사선
structural equation model%graded response model%item response theory%personality scale%item selection
为比较结构方程模型和 IRT等级反应模型在人格量表项目筛选上的作用，以《中国大学生人格量表》的7229个实际测量数据为基础，针对因素二“爽直”分别以Lisrel8.70和Multilog7.03进行结构方程模型和等级反应模型的参数估计与拟合，比较两种方法的项目筛选结果.二者统计结果均认为项目5、6、7、8拟合度不佳，在结构方程模型上表现为因子负荷较低，整体拟合指数不理想；在等级反应模型上表现为区分度参数和位置参数不理想，相关项目的特征曲线和信息曲线形态较差.但结构方程模型倾向于项目6、8更差，而等级反应模型则倾向于项目5、6更差.结构方程模型和 IRT等级反应模型对人格量表项目的统计推断结果从总体上讲是一致的，但在个别项目上略有差异.二者各有优势，可以结合使用.
為比較結構方程模型和 IRT等級反應模型在人格量錶項目篩選上的作用，以《中國大學生人格量錶》的7229箇實際測量數據為基礎，針對因素二“爽直”分彆以Lisrel8.70和Multilog7.03進行結構方程模型和等級反應模型的參數估計與擬閤，比較兩種方法的項目篩選結果.二者統計結果均認為項目5、6、7、8擬閤度不佳，在結構方程模型上錶現為因子負荷較低，整體擬閤指數不理想；在等級反應模型上錶現為區分度參數和位置參數不理想，相關項目的特徵麯線和信息麯線形態較差.但結構方程模型傾嚮于項目6、8更差，而等級反應模型則傾嚮于項目5、6更差.結構方程模型和 IRT等級反應模型對人格量錶項目的統計推斷結果從總體上講是一緻的，但在箇彆項目上略有差異.二者各有優勢，可以結閤使用.
위비교결구방정모형화 IRT등급반응모형재인격량표항목사선상적작용，이《중국대학생인격량표》적7229개실제측량수거위기출，침대인소이“상직”분별이Lisrel8.70화Multilog7.03진행결구방정모형화등급반응모형적삼수고계여의합，비교량충방법적항목사선결과.이자통계결과균인위항목5、6、7、8의합도불가，재결구방정모형상표현위인자부하교저，정체의합지수불이상；재등급반응모형상표현위구분도삼수화위치삼수불이상，상관항목적특정곡선화신식곡선형태교차.단결구방정모형경향우항목6、8경차，이등급반응모형칙경향우항목5、6경차.결구방정모형화 IRT등급반응모형대인격량표항목적통계추단결과종총체상강시일치적，단재개별항목상략유차이.이자각유우세，가이결합사용.
Obj ective To compare the application of the structural equation model and the IRT graded response model in i-tem selection of personality scale.Methods Lisrel 8.70 and Multilog 7.03 were applied respectively to estimate parameters and indexes of goodness-of-fit in the structural equation model and the IRT graded response model in terms of the second factor of"forthright"in the Chinese College Student Personality Scale,on the basis of 7229 measured cases.Results The results of the two models indicated that neither was good enough in terms of the goodness-of-fit on item 5,6,7,and 8.On the one hand, the typical feature was found to be a too low factor load and an unsatisfactory overall fit index in term of the structural equation model.In term of the IRT graded response model,the major faults were found to have a rather unsatisfactory differentiation parameter and a bad location parameter with too poor a shape of the characteristic curve and the information curve for the relat-ed items.Items 6 and 8 tend to be much worse in term of the structural equation model while Items 5 and 7 are found to be worse in term of the IRT graded response model.Conclusion The inference results of both models were consistent in general, although there were slight differences on a few specific items.These two models could be applied in combination since each one has its advantages.
