# Diagnosing Noisy Anchors

Item bank constructors go to great pains to obtain item calibrations that have exhibited good fit when administered to large, relevant samples of examinees. But what if this isn't possible? What can happen when anchor values are of doubtful quality? We encountered this situation doing "common person" equating. We had a set of persons measured on our standard item bank, who also took a pilot test (of the same construct) that we wanted to equate to the bank. This pilot test had no items in common with our bank. So "common item" equating was out. We tried "common person" equating. A well-known drawback to common person equating is that person abilities are generally less stable than item difficulties. Ability, as it is applied, can change quickly over time! But we tried it anyway. Let's see what happened.

```        -2       -1        0        1        2        3
+---+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--+
I    |                      |    1                       |
T   3+                      |                            +
E    |                      |                            |
M    |                      |                            |
|                     1|   1                        |
2+----------------------2----------------------------+
I    |                  11  |1                           |
N    |                    11|1                           |
F    |                 1  1 |                            |
I   1+                     1|1          1                +
T    |          1   1    1  21 1  11 1 1                 |
|                1   1 |     1 22    1 1            |
|           1      1 221       1    21  1  1        |
S   0+-1--------1----1------|----------1-111------------1+
T    |    111121 21 1  1 1  |1       1                   |
D    |1  111 2     1 1      |    1 1                     |
|       1 122   11  11 1   2                        |
-1+      11     11   1  1|1                           +
|               1    1 |  1                         |
|                 1 1  | 1                          |
|                      |                            |
-2+----------------------|----------------------------+
|                   1  |                            |
|                      |                            |
|                      |                            |
-3+                     1|                            +
+---+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--+
-2       -1        0        1        2        3
ITEM  MEASURE
```

Fig. 1. Fit of items to pilot data without anchoring

Figure 1 shows the item fit in the pilot test analyzed in the usual way without anchoring. Fit is distributed in a reasonable way for a test that is targeted on the persons. Perhaps there are 3 or 4 misbehaving items, but not much to worry about. Then we anchored the persons at their bank measures. The fit plot now looks like Figure 2. There is catastrophic misfit! And it is worst for the central items, those most informative about person performance. What has happened?

```      -8      -7      -6      -5      -4      -3      -2      -1
+-+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-+
7+                       2                                   +
I    |                    1  |                                   |
T   6+                      2|1                                  +
E    |                       41                                  |
M   5+                     2 1 111                               +
|                  11132|  1                                |
4+                   12111 1 1                               +
I    |                 1 1122|    1  1                           |
N   3+               11 11  1|    11                             +
F    |               211  1  |  1  13  1                         |
I   2+------------21-11------|---1--11-------------------------  +
T    |        1 11131   1    |          11                       |
1+      1211111  1       |       1 11 31 1                   +
|    11 1 31 1          |          1 1    1                 |
S   0+--1--------------------|-------------------------1-------  +
T    |                       |                                   |
D  -1+                       |                                   +
+-+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-+
-8      -7      -6      -5      -4      -3      -2      -1
ITEM  MEASURE

111324334642
PERSON        42214274491951564826228122 241                11
Q    S    M    S    Q
```

Fig. 2. Person-anchored fit of items to pilot data

Examination of the two sets of person measures, plotted in Figure 3, reveals all. Their correlation is less than 0.2. Forcing the contradictory anchored person measures on the pilot data has introduced noise into the measurement system. This noise has piled up in the central items, those most sensitive to person disordering, but is less noticeable in the extreme items.

The moral of the story: always choose your anchored elements carefully, particularly if they are persons!

Betty Bergstrom

Diagnosing Noisy Anchors. Bergstrom B. Rasch Measurement Transactions 1994 7:4 p.327

Diagnosing Noisy Anchors. Bergstrom B. … Rasch Measurement Transactions, 1994, 7:4 p.327

Rasch Publications
Rasch Measurement Transactions (free, online) Rasch Measurement research papers (free, online) Probabilistic Models for Some Intelligence and Attainment Tests, Georg Rasch Applying the Rasch Model 3rd. Ed., Bond & Fox Best Test Design, Wright & Stone
Rating Scale Analysis, Wright & Masters Introduction to Rasch Measurement, E. Smith & R. Smith Introduction to Many-Facet Rasch Measurement, Thomas Eckes Invariant Measurement: Using Rasch Models in the Social, Behavioral, and Health Sciences, George Engelhard, Jr. Statistical Analyses for Language Testers, Rita Green
Rasch Models: Foundations, Recent Developments, and Applications, Fischer & Molenaar Journal of Applied Measurement Rasch models for measurement, David Andrich Constructing Measures, Mark Wilson Rasch Analysis in the Human Sciences, Boone, Stave, Yale
in Spanish: Análisis de Rasch para todos, Agustín Tristán Mediciones, Posicionamientos y Diagnósticos Competitivos, Juan Ramón Oreja Rodríguez

 Forum Rasch Measurement Forum to discuss any Rasch-related topic

Go to Top of Page
Go to index of all Rasch Measurement Transactions
AERA members: Join the Rasch Measurement SIG and receive the printed version of RMT
Some back issues of RMT are available as bound volumes
Subscribe to Journal of Applied Measurement

Go to Institute for Objective Measurement Home Page. The Rasch Measurement SIG (AERA) thanks the Institute for Objective Measurement for inviting the publication of Rasch Measurement Transactions on the Institute's website, www.rasch.org.

Coming Rasch-related Events
March 31, 2017, Fri. Conference: 11th UK Rasch Day, Warwick, UK, www.rasch.org.uk
April 2-3, 2017, Sun.-Mon. Conference: Validity Evidence for Measurement in Mathematics Education (V-M2Ed), San Antonio, TX, Information
April 26-30, 2017, Wed.-Sun. NCME, San Antonio, TX, www.ncme.org - April 29: Ben Wright book
April 27 - May 1, 2017, Thur.-Mon. AERA, San Antonio, TX, www.aera.net
May 26 - June 23, 2017, Fri.-Fri. On-line workshop: Practical Rasch Measurement - Core Topics (E. Smith, Winsteps), www.statistics.com
June 30 - July 29, 2017, Fri.-Fri. On-line workshop: Practical Rasch Measurement - Further Topics (E. Smith, Winsteps), www.statistics.com
July 31 - Aug. 3, 2017, Mon.-Thurs. Joint IMEKO TC1-TC7-TC13 Symposium 2017: Measurement Science challenges in Natural and Social Sciences, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, imeko-tc7-rio.org.br
Aug. 7-9, 2017, Mon-Wed. In-person workshop and research coloquium: Effect size of family and school indexes in writing competence using TERCE data (C. Pardo, A. Atorressi, Winsteps), Bariloche Argentina. Carlos Pardo, Universidad Catòlica de Colombia
Aug. 7-9, 2017, Mon-Wed. PROMS 2017: Pacific Rim Objective Measurement Symposium, Sabah, Borneo, Malaysia, proms.promsociety.org/2017/
Aug. 10, 2017, Thurs. In-person Winsteps Training Workshop (M. Linacre, Winsteps), Sydney, Australia. www.winsteps.com/sydneyws.htm
Aug. 11 - Sept. 8, 2017, Fri.-Fri. On-line workshop: Many-Facet Rasch Measurement (E. Smith, Facets), www.statistics.com
Aug. 18-21, 2017, Fri.-Mon. IACAT 2017: International Association for Computerized Adaptive Testing, Niigata, Japan, iacat.org
Sept. 15-16, 2017, Fri.-Sat. IOMC 2017: International Outcome Measurement Conference, Chicago, jampress.org/iomc2017.htm
Oct. 13 - Nov. 10, 2017, Fri.-Fri. On-line workshop: Practical Rasch Measurement - Core Topics (E. Smith, Winsteps), www.statistics.com
Jan. 5 - Feb. 2, 2018, Fri.-Fri. On-line workshop: Practical Rasch Measurement - Core Topics (E. Smith, Winsteps), www.statistics.com
Jan. 10-16, 2018, Wed.-Tues. In-person workshop: Advanced Course in Rasch Measurement Theory and the application of RUMM2030, Perth, Australia (D. Andrich), Announcement
Jan. 17-19, 2018, Wed.-Fri. Rasch Conference: Seventh International Conference on Probabilistic Models for Measurement, Matilda Bay Club, Perth, Australia, Website
May 25 - June 22, 2018, Fri.-Fri. On-line workshop: Practical Rasch Measurement - Core Topics (E. Smith, Winsteps), www.statistics.com
June 29 - July 27, 2018, Fri.-Fri. On-line workshop: Practical Rasch Measurement - Further Topics (E. Smith, Winsteps), www.statistics.com
Aug. 10 - Sept. 7, 2018, Fri.-Fri. On-line workshop: Many-Facet Rasch Measurement (E. Smith, Facets), www.statistics.com
Oct. 12 - Nov. 9, 2018, Fri.-Fri. On-line workshop: Practical Rasch Measurement - Core Topics (E. Smith, Winsteps), www.statistics.com