A Rasch analysis of Raven's standard progressive matrices

Citation
Ahgs. Van Der Ven et Jl. Ellis, A Rasch analysis of Raven's standard progressive matrices, PERS INDIV, 29(1), 2000, pp. 45-64
Citations number
42
Categorie Soggetti
Psycology
Journal title
PERSONALITY AND INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES
ISSN journal
01918869 → ACNP
Volume
29
Issue
1
Year of publication
2000
Pages
45 - 64
Database
ISI
SICI code
0191-8869(200007)29:1<45:ARAORS>2.0.ZU;2-U
Abstract
Unidimensionality was investigated for Raven's Standard Progressive Matrice s, one of the most widely used intelligence tests in the world. The test wa s administered as part of a research project devoted to the identification of highly gifted children. Unidimensionality was tested by means of the Ras ch model, which was applied to subsets A-E separately. The Rasch model was not rejected for sets A, C and D. It was rejected for sets B and E, meaning that the items of these sets measure at least two different dimensions. It was hypothesized that these dimensions are Gestalt continuation and analog ical reasoning for set B, and analogical reasoning and coping for set E. In the case of set C Rasch homogeneity could be considerably improved by assu ming a second factor, apart from analogical reasoning, which was identified as lack of resistance to perceptual distracters. Splitting of set B into a ppropriate subsets yielded two unidimensional subsets, B1 and B2. Splitting of set E yielded one unidimensional subset El and a heterogeneous, multidi mensional subset E2. Set C was redefined by disregarding some of its items. At the level of the newly defined subset scores the factor analogical reas oning is common to all subsets. The factor Gestalt continuation is common t o the subsets A and B1. However, the reliability of these subsets were very low, implying that this factor might be too weak to be distinguishable in a factor analysis. The factors coping and lack of resistance to perceptual distracters are both unique. Therefore, one might expect the emergence of o nly one factor when a factor analysis would be performed on all newly defin ed subsets. However, factor analysis of the newly defined subsets yielded t wo factors. Further inspection of the factor plot showed that the emergence of a second factor could be considered as an artefact due to the skewness of the subset scores. (C) 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.