SavedAdd your journal

Journals / International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education / 2019 / Cilt: 6 - Sayı: 2

Examination of the Extreme Response Style of Students using IRTree: The Case of TIMSS 2015

Münevver İLGÜN DİBEK
Pages
300–313
Publication Date
2022-10-18
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

It was concluded that an extreme response style had an effect on students’ attitude.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In the literature, response style is one of the factors causing an achievement-attitude paradox and threatens the validity of the results obtained from studies.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Firstly, it attempts to determine which item response tree (IRTree) models based on the generalized linear mixed model (GLMM) approach (random intercept, random intercept with the fixed effect of extreme response and random intercept-slope model) best fit the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) 2015 data.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:It was concluded that an extreme response style had an effect on students’ attitude.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:2015 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Attitude · Extreme Response Style · Item Response Tree

Abstract

In the literature, response style is one of the factors causing an achievement-attitude paradox and threatens the validity of the results obtained from studies. In this regard, the aim of this study is two-fold. Firstly, it attempts to determine which item response tree (IRTree) models based on the generalized linear mixed model (GLMM) approach (random intercept, random intercept with the fixed effect of extreme response and random intercept-slope model) best fit the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) 2015 data. Secondly, it purports to explore how the extreme response style affects students’ attitudes toward mathematics of students. This study is both basic research and descriptive research in terms of seeking for answers for two different research questions. For the sample of this research, 15 countries were randomly selected among countries participated in TIMSS 2015. The students’ responses to items measuring attitude in the student questionnaire were analyzed with the packages “lme4” and “irtrees” in R software. When the model fit indices were evaluated, the random intercept-slope model was found to be the best fit to the data. According to this model, the extreme response style explains a significant amount of variances in the students’ attitude toward mathematics. Additionally, students with a negative attitude toward mathematics were found to have an extreme response style. It was concluded that an extreme response style had an effect on students’ attitude.

Özet

In the literature, response style is one of the factors causing an achievement-attitude paradox and threatens the validity of the results obtained from studies. In this regard, the aim of this study is two-fold. Firstly, it attempts to determine which item response tree (IRTree) models based on the generalized linear mixed model (GLMM) approach (random intercept, random intercept with the fixed effect of extreme response and random intercept-slope model) best fit the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) 2015 data. Secondly, it purports to explore how the extreme response style affects students’ attitudes toward mathematics of students. This study is both basic research and descriptive research in terms of seeking for answers for two different research questions. For the sample of this research, 15 countries were randomly selected among countries participated in TIMSS 2015. The students’ responses to items measuring attitude in the student questionnaire were analyzed with the packages “lme4” and “irtrees” in R software. When the model fit indices were evaluated, the random intercept-slope model was found to be the best fit to the data. According to this model, the extreme response style explains a significant amount of variances in the students’ attitude toward mathematics. Additionally, students with a negative attitude toward mathematics were found to have an extreme response style. It was concluded that an extreme response style had an effect on students’ attitude.

🔖

Cite This Article

DİBEK, M. İ. (2022). Examination of the Extreme Response Style of Students using IRTree: The Case of TIMSS 2015. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, Cilt: 6 - Sayı: 2, 300–313. https://ajindex.com/articles/540187

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (9)

  1. Andrich, D. (1978). A rating formulation for ordered response categories. Psychometrika, 43, 561–573.
  2. Atkinson, J. W. (1957). Motivational determinants of risk-taking behavior. Psychological Review, 64, 359-373.
  3. Bachman, J. G., O’Malley, P. M., & Freedman-Doan, P. (2010). Response styles revisited: Racial/ethnic and gender differences in extreme responding (Monitoring the Future Occasional Paper No. 72). Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research. Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B. & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1-48. doi:10.18637/jss.v067.i01 Bofah, E. A. and Hannula, M. S. (2015). TIMSS data in an African comparative perspective: Investigating the factors influencing achievement in mathematics and their psychometric properties. Large-Scale Assessments in Education, 3(1), doi:1.1186/s40536-015-0014-y Bolt, D. M., & Newton, J. (2011). Multiscale measurement of extreme response style. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 71, 814-833.
  4. Bolt, D., Wollack, J., & Suh, Y. (2012). Application of a multidimensional nested logit model to multiple-choice test items. Psychometrika, 77, 339–357.
  5. Böckenholt, U. (2012). Modeling multiple response processes in judgment and choice. Psychological Methods, 17(4), 665-678.
  6. Böckenholt, U. (2017). Measuring response styles in Likert items. Psychological Methods, 22(1), 69–83. doi:10.1037/met0000106 Böckenholt, U. & Meiser, T. (2017). Response style analysis with threshold and multi-process IRT models: A review and tutorial. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 70, 159–181. doi:10.1111/bmsp.12086
  7. Buckley, J. (2009, June). Cross-national response styles in international educational assessment: Evidence from PISA 2006. NCES Conference on the Program for International Student Assessment: What we can learn from PISA, Washington, DC. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2005). Sosyal Bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı[Data analysis handbook for social sciences]. 5. baskı. Pagem A Yayıncılık. Bybee, R.,& McCrae, B. (2007). Scientific literacy and student attitudes: Perspectives from PISA 2006 science. International Journal of Science Education, 33, 7-26.
  8. Cronbach, L. J. (1946). Response sets and test validity. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 6, 475-494.
  9. Culpepper, S. (2014). If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again: Applications of sequential IRT models to cognitive assessments. Applied Psychological Measurement, 38, 632– 644. D