Brown Ted, Unsworth Carolyn, Lyons Carissa
School of Occupational Therapy, Faculty of Health Sciences, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria, Australia.
Aust Occup Ther J. 2009 Dec;56(6):393-402. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1630.2009.00811.x.
One method of evaluating the construct validity of instruments is the Rasch Measurement Model (RMM), an increasingly popular method used for test construction and validation.
The aim was to examine the construct validity of the Developmental Test of Visual-Motor Integration 5th Edition (VMI) by applying the RMM to evaluate its scalability, dimensionality, differential item functioning and hierarchical ordering.
The participants were 400 children aged 5 to 12 years, recruited from six schools in Melbourne, Victoria, who completed the VMI under the supervision of an occupational therapist. VMI items 1, 2 and 3 were excluded from the Rasch analysis since all of the children achieved a perfect score on these items.
None of the items exhibited RMM misfit due to goodness-of-fit mean square (MnSq) infit statistics and standardised z (ZStd) scores being outside the specified acceptable range. VMI item 9 (copied circle) exhibited differential item functioning based on gender. In relation to hierarchical ordering of items, several were found to have similar logit difficulty values. For example, VMI items 26, 27 and 29; items 18, 22 and 24; and items 4, 5 and 11 were found to have the same level of challenge. As well, the VMI scale item logit measure order did not match that presented in the VMI test manual.
Theoretically, the VMI items are developmentally ordered; however, this ordering was not mirrored by the item logit difficulty scores obtained. This has scoring implications, where scoring a respondent's VMI test booklet is terminated after three consecutive items are not passed. Clinicians should also be aware that item 9 may exhibit bias related to gender.
评估工具构想效度的一种方法是拉施测量模型(RMM),这是一种在测验编制和验证中越来越受欢迎的方法。
旨在通过应用拉施测量模型来检验视觉 - 运动整合发育测试第5版(VMI)的构想效度,以评估其可扩展性、维度性、项目功能差异和等级排序。
参与者为400名5至12岁的儿童,从维多利亚州墨尔本的六所学校招募,他们在职业治疗师的监督下完成了VMI测试。由于所有儿童在VMI的第1、2和3项上都获得了满分,因此将这几项排除在拉施分析之外。
由于拟合优度均方(MnSq)内拟合统计量和标准化z(ZStd)分数超出指定的可接受范围,没有项目表现出拉施测量模型不拟合。VMI第9项(复制圆圈)基于性别表现出项目功能差异。关于项目的等级排序,发现有几项具有相似的logit难度值。例如,发现VMI第26、27和29项;第18、22和24项;以及第4、5和11项具有相同的挑战水平。此外,VMI量表项目的logit测量顺序与VMI测试手册中呈现的顺序不匹配。
从理论上讲,VMI项目是按发育顺序排列的;然而,获得的项目logit难度分数并未反映出这种排序。这对评分有影响,即当连续三项未通过时,对受访者VMI测试手册的评分即终止。临床医生还应意识到第9项可能表现出与性别相关的偏差。