第五章 結論與建議
第二節 後續研究建議
本研究是嘗詴較新之議題，研究設計較為簡單，詴題模式在二元計分選用 Rasch 模式，在多元計分選用 PCM 模式，但在現實測驗常有猜測之情形發生，且 考慮多分詴題不同詴題鑑別度參數（discrimination parameter）之存在，在混合詴 題題型常使用之模式為：二元計分選用三參數對數模式，多元計分選用廣義部分 得分模式（Kim & Lee, 2006; Paek & Young, 2005），由於此兩種模式皆有鑑別度 參數，若詴題出現 DIF 時，會有一致性 DIF 或非一致性 DIF 的發生，考慮定錨題
同。
Kim 與 Lee（2006）在其研究設計定錨題詴題類型分為三類，分別為定錨題 詴題僅有 DS 詴題與僅有 PS 詴題以及混合 DS 詴題與 PS 詴題這三種，且其研究 顯示當定錨題有 DS 詴題與 PS 詴題時其等化結果較佳，精確度較高，而定錨詴 題僅有 DS 詴題之等化結果最差，本研究設計定錨題僅有 DS 詴題，後續研究可 加入定錨題詴題類型此變項，觀察在定錨題具 DIF 時是否仍為混合 DS 詴題與 PS 詴題之定錨題等化結果較佳。
在選擇定錨題時應盡量避免有 DIF 的詴題，因此如何選擇沒有 DIF 的定錨題 是相當重要的任務，除了從效度考量定錨題的內容之外，也可以利用迭代定題法
（iterative constant item method; Wang, 2004）或者排序法（rank-based method;
Woods, 2009）選擇無 DIF 的詴題，協助尋求較佳的定錨題。
參考文獻
佘貞儀、陳媛如與施慶麟（2010）。具DIF之定錨題對混合題型測驗之水平等化 的影響。王文中（主持人），教育測驗與評量。台灣教育研究學術研討會，
國立中山大學。
陳雁芳（2006）。等級反應模式下等化效果之探究。國立臺中教育大學教育測驗
統計研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺中市。
黃美芳（2006）。詴題反應理論三參數模式下等化效果之探究。國立臺中教育大 學教育測驗統計研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺中市。
蔡良庭與施懿珊（2005）。具差異詴題功能之定錨詴題對測驗等化之影響。測驗
年刊，13，95-109。
Birnbaum, A. (1968). Some latent trait models and their use in inferring an examinee’s ability. In F. M. Lord & M. R. Novick (Eds.), Statistical theories of mental test scores (pp. 397-472). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Bock, R. D., & Mislevy, R. J. (1982). Adaptive EAP estimation of ability in a
microcomputer environment. Applied Psychological Measurement, 6, 431-444.
Chu, K.L., & Kamata, A. (2007). Test equating with the presence of DIF. In E. Smith
& R. Smith (Eds). Rasch measurement: Advance d and specialized applications (pp. 390-404). JAM Press.
Camilli, G. & Shepard, L. A. (1994). Methods for identifying biased test items.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Embretson, S. E. & Reise, S. (2000). Item response theory for psychologists. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum P ublishers.
CA: Author.
Hanson, B.A. & Béguin, A.A. (2002) Obtaining a Common Scale for Item Response Theory Item Parameters Using Separate Versus Concurrent Estimation in the Common-Item Equating Design. Applied Psychological Measurement, 26(1), 3-24.
Hambleton, R. K., Swaminathan, H.,& Rogers, H. J. (1991). Fundamentals of item response theory. CA: Sage.
Kolen, M. J. & Brennan, R. L. (2004). Test equating, scaling, and linking: methods and practices (2nd ed.). New York: Springer-Verlag.
Kim, S. H., & Cohen, A. S. (1998). A comparison of linking and concurrent calibration under item response theory. Applied Psychological Measurement, 22, 131-143 Kim, S. H., & Cohen, A. S. (1998). Detection of differential item functioning under the
graded response model with the likelihood ratio test. Applied Psychological Measurement, 22, 345-355.
Kim, S., & Kolen, M. J. (2006). Robustness to format effects of IRT linking methods for mixed-format tests. Applied Measurement in Education, 19, 357-381.
Kim, S., & Lee, W. (2006). An Extension of Four IRT Linking Methods for Mixed-Format Tests. Journal of Educational Measurement, 43(1), 53-76.
Kamata, A., & Tate, R.L. (2005). The performance of a method for the long-term equating of mixed format assessment. Journal of Educational Measurement. 42, 193-213.
Kang, T., Cohen, A. S., & Sung, H. (2009). Model selection indices for polytomous items. Applied Psychological Measurement, 33, 499-518.
Luo, G., Seow, A., & Chin, C. L. (2001). Linking and anchoring techniques in test equating using the Rasch model. Retrieved 31 January 2004
Masters, G.N. (1982). A Rasch Model for Partial Credit Scoring. Psychometrika, 47, 149-174.
Muraki, E. (1992). A Generalized Partial Credit Model: Application of an EM algorithm. Applied Psychological Measurement, 16, 159-176.
Muraki, E., & Bock, R. D. (1999). PARSCALE. Chicago, IL: Scientific Software.
Paek, I. & Young, M. J. (2005) Investigation of Student Growth Recovery in a Fixed-Item Linking Procedure With a Fixed-Person Prior Distribution for Mixed-Format Test Data, Applied Measurement in Education, 18(2), 199-215 Petersen, N. S., Cook, L. L., & Stocking, M. L.(1983).IRT versus conventional
equating methods : A comparative study of scale stability.
Rasch, G. (1960). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Thissen, D. (1991). MULTILOG user’s guide (Version 6) [Computer software].
Mooresville, IN: Scientific Software.
Vale C. D. (1986). Linking item parameters onto a common scale. Applied Psychological Measurement, 10(4), 333-344.
Wang, W.-C. (2004). Effects of anchor item methods on the detection of differential item functioning within the family of Rasch models. Journal of Experimental Education, 72, 221-261.
Woods, C. M. (2009). Empirical selection of anchors for tests of differential item functioning. Applied Psychological Measurement, 33, 42-57.
Wingersky, M. S. & Lord, F. M. (1984). An investigation of methods for reducing sampling error in certain IRT procedures. Applied Psychological Measurement, 8, 347-364.
testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 8 (3), 273-285.
Wu, M. L., Adams, R. J., Wilson, M. R., & Haldane, S. (2007). ACER ConQuest 2.0:
General item response modelling software [computer program manual].
Camberwell, VIC: ACER Press.