Methoden vergelijken
Bekijk de geselecteerde methoden naast elkaar; rijen die verschillen zijn gemarkeerd.
| Item Response Theory (IRT)× | Confirmatory factor analysis× | |
|---|---|---|
| Vakgebied | Psychometrie | Psychometrie |
| Familie | Latent structure | Latent structure |
| Jaar van ontstaan≠ | 1952–1968 | 1969 |
| Grondlegger≠ | Frederic M. Lord (and Allan Birnbaum for the 2PL/3PL models) | Karl Gustav Jöreskog |
| Type≠ | Probabilistic measurement model | Hypothesis-testing latent variable model |
| Oorspronkelijke bron≠ | Lord, F. M. & Novick, M. R. (1968). Statistical Theories of Mental Test Scores. Addison-Wesley. link ↗ | Jöreskog, K. G. (1969). A general approach to confirmatory maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 34(2), 183–202. DOI ↗ |
| Aliassen | IRT, latent trait theory, item characteristic curve theory, modern test theory | CFA, confirmatory FA, measurement model, restricted factor analysis |
| Verwant≠ | 5 | 4 |
| Samenvatting≠ | Item response theory models the probability that a respondent answers an item correctly (or endorses it) as a function of the respondent's latent trait level and the item's own statistical properties — difficulty, discrimination, and guessing. Unlike classical test theory, IRT places persons and items on the same scale, yielding measurement that is sample-independent for items and test-independent for persons. | Confirmatory factor analysis tests a researcher-specified factor structure against observed data. Unlike exploratory approaches, the researcher decides in advance which indicators load on which latent factor, and the model is evaluated by how closely the implied covariance matrix reproduces the sample covariance matrix. CFA is central to scale validation, construct validity assessment, and measurement invariance testing. |
| ScholarGateGegevensset ↗ |
|
|