[Rasch] Hierarchical Rasch Modeling

Robert Hess Robert.Hess at ASU.edu
Sat Jun 8 09:35:08 EST 2013

First, I disagree with your reviewer. Mike is absolutely correct, if you do
everything at one time all you do is compound any felonies that might've
been committed in level I to the point that when you reach level III either
nothing works or everything works because you missed any possible sources of
unexplained error by attempting to do everything in a single pass. And you
are correct, HLM will not do what you are doing nor will it do what the
reviewer seems to be requesting.
My best suggestion for you, is to layout the argument detailing clearly why
you chose to do the three-step process (as you did in your earlier note) and
find another way to express the sentiment laid out by Mike. Sometimes you're
dealing with a reviewer who really doesn't understand the model you are
employing and you have to find a logical explanation why you are sticking to
your original model - you address this to the editor, but as an explanation,
not as a failure on the part of the reviewer to understand your model (which
I will bet dollars to dimes) is what happened.
Good luck.
Bob Hess

-----Original Message-----
From: rasch-bounces at acer.edu.au [mailto:rasch-bounces at acer.edu.au] On Behalf
Of Mike Linacre
Sent: Friday, June 07, 2013 3:56 PM
To: rasch at acer.edu.au
Subject: Re: [Rasch] Hierarchical Rasch Modeling

Stuart and folks:

The reviewer seems to be addressing the wrong issue: "it would be more
efficient ..."

Surely concern should focus on "it would be more accurate ..."

In science in general, the more accurate approach is "one thing at a time".
This approach is your 3-level approach where findings at each level can be
verified before the next level is attempted. In the combined approach,
inaccuracies at the first level are likely to be invisible by the third
level producing undetectable distortions in the findings.

Mike L.

Rasch mailing list
Rasch at acer.edu.au

More information about the Rasch mailing list