Abstract
This paper presents a new class of models for persons-by-items data. The essential new feature of this class is the representation of the persons: every person is represented by its membership tomultiple latent classes, each of which belongs to onelatent classification. The models can be considered as a formalization of the hypothesis that the responses come about in a process that involves the application of a number ofmental operations. Two algorithms for maximum likelihood (ML) and maximum a posteriori (MAP) estimation are described. They both make use of the tractability of the complete data likelihood to maximize the observed data likelihood. Properties of the MAP estimators (i.e., uniqueness and goodness-of-recovery) and the existence of asymptotic standard errors were examined in a simulation study. Then, one of these models is applied to the responses to a set of fraction addition problems. Finally, the models are compared to some related models in the literature.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bishop, Y.M.M., Fienberg, S., & Holland, P.W. (1975).Discrete multivariate analysis: Theory and practice. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Bock, R. D., & Aitkin, M. (1981). Marginal maximum likelihood estimation of item parameters: Application of an EM algorithm.Psychometrika, 46, 443–459.
De Boeck, P., & Rosenberg, S. (1988). Hierarchical classes: Model and data analysis.Psychometrika, 53, 361–381.
Dempster, A. P., Laird, N. M., & Rubin, D. B. (1977). Maximum likelihood estimation from incomplete data via the EM algorithm (with discussion).Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 39, 1–38.
Embretson, S. (1980). Multicomponent latent trait models for ability tests.Psychometrika, 45, 479–494.
Gelman, A., Carlin, J. B., Stern, H. S., & Rubin, D. B. (1995).Bayesian data analysis. London: Chapman & Hall.
Gill, P. E., Murray, W., & Wright, M. H. (1981).Practical optimization. New York: Academic Press.
Goodman, L. A. (1974). The analysis of systems of qualitative variables when some of the variables are unobservable. Part I: a modified latent structure approach.American Journal of Sociology, 79, 1179–1259.
Hagenaars, J. A. (1990).Categorical longitudinal data; loglinear panel, trend and cohort analysis. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Hagenaars, J. A. (1993).Loglinear models with latent variables. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Heinen, T. (1993).Discrete latent variable models. Tilburg (The Netherlands): Tilburg University Press.
Kelderman, H., & Rijkes, C. P. M. (1994). Loglinear multidimensional IRT models for polytomously scored items.Psychometrika, 59, 149–176.
Lazarsfeld, P. F., & Henry, N. W. (1968).Latent structure analysis. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Louis, T. A. (1982). Finding the observed information matrix when using the EM algorithm.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 44, 226–233.
Maris, E. (1995). Psychometric latent response models.Psychometrika, 60, 523–547.
Maris, E., De Boeck, P., & Van Mechelen, I. (1996). Probability matrix decomposition models.Psychometrika, 61, 7–29.
McLachlan, G. J., & Basford, K. E. (1988).Mixture models. New York: Marcel Dekker.
Mood, A., Graybill, F. A., & Boes, D. C. (1974).Introduction to the theory of statistics. Tokyo, Japan: McGraw-Hill.
Muthén, B. (1978). Contributions to factor analysis of dichotomous variables.Psychometrika, 43, 551–560.
Novick, M. R., & Jackson, J. E. (1974).Statistical methods for educational and psychological research. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Rubin, D. B. (1987). A non-iterative sampling/importance resampling alternative to the data augmentation algorithm for creating a few imputations when fractions of missing information are modest. Discussion of Tanner & Wong (1987).Journal of the American Statistical Association, 82, 543–546.
Tatsuoka, K.K. (1984).Analysis of fraction addition and subtraction problems (NIE Final Report). Urbana, IL: University of Illinois, Computer-based Education Research.
Van Mechelen, I., De Boeck, P., & Rosenberg, S. (1995). The conjunctive model of hierarchical classes.Psychometrika, 60, 505–521.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Thanks are to Paul De Boeck for creating the intellectually stimulating atmosphere in which this class of models came about, Iven van Mechelen for theone-sided idea, Kikumi Tatsuoka for the use of her data, and Theodoor Bouw for running part of the simulation study.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Maris, E. Estimating multiple classification latent class models. Psychometrika 64, 187–212 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02294535
Received:
Revised:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02294535