[Rasch] 4 vs 1 dimension
talilij at yahoo.com
Thu Jan 22 16:58:23 EST 2009
I thought that each subscale is a dimension. Thereby, there are 4 dimensions since the entire instrument has 4 subscales. I dont know if this thinking is right.
--- On Thu, 1/22/09, Stephanou, Andrew <Stephanou at acer.edu.au> wrote:
From: Stephanou, Andrew <Stephanou at acer.edu.au>
Subject: RE: [Rasch] 4 vs 1 dimension
To: talilij at yahoo.com
Date: Thursday, 22 January, 2009, 5:39 AM
"Though I know that the instrument has 4 dimensions"
How do you know? Isn't this only an assumption?
From: rasch-bounces at acer.edu.au on behalf of Juanito Talili
Sent: Wed 1/21/2009 5:10 PM
Subject: [Rasch] 4 vs 1 dimension
The 50-item instrument has 4 subscales where each subscale has 2 to 15 items
quantified using 4-point ordinal scale coded 1=strongly disagree to 4=strongly
agree. Though I know that the instrument has 4 dimensions, I've tried to
test the unidimensionality of the overall 50 items. Using Winsteps, the % of
variance explained is somewhat acceptable (>75%) for a unidimensional
assumption. Am I wrong if I do Rasch analysis for the entire instrument rather
than Rasch analysis for each domain?
: Faster, More Secure,Customizable and FREE.
New Email addresses available on Yahoo!
Get the Email name you've always wanted on the new @ymail and @rocketmail.
Hurry before someone else does!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Rasch