↓ Skip to main content

Response Mixture Modeling: Accounting for Heterogeneity in Item Characteristics across Response Times

Overview of attention for article published in Psychometrika, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
25 Mendeley
Title
Response Mixture Modeling: Accounting for Heterogeneity in Item Characteristics across Response Times
Published in
Psychometrika, February 2018
DOI 10.1007/s11336-017-9602-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dylan Molenaar, Paul de Boeck

Abstract

In item response theory modeling of responses and response times, it is commonly assumed that the item responses have the same characteristics across the response times. However, heterogeneity might arise in the data if subjects resort to different response processes when solving the test items. These differences may be within-subject effects, that is, a subject might use a certain process on some of the items and a different process with different item characteristics on the other items. If the probability of using one process over the other process depends on the subject's response time, within-subject heterogeneity of the item characteristics across the response times arises. In this paper, the method of response mixture modeling is presented to account for such heterogeneity. Contrary to traditional mixture modeling where the full response vectors are classified, response mixture modeling involves classification of the individual elements in the response vector. In a simulation study, the response mixture model is shown to be viable in terms of parameter recovery. In addition, the response mixture model is applied to a real dataset to illustrate its use in investigating within-subject heterogeneity in the item characteristics across response times.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 25 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 28%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 16%
Researcher 4 16%
Student > Master 3 12%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 8%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 3 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 8 32%
Social Sciences 8 32%
Computer Science 2 8%
Linguistics 2 8%
Engineering 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 January 2024.
All research outputs
#16,220,420
of 25,629,945 outputs
Outputs from Psychometrika
#358
of 529 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#256,994
of 450,502 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Psychometrika
#2
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,629,945 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 529 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 450,502 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.