Hostname: page-component-6898cfcb55-zkb6p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-11T21:16:05.768Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Simple Technique for Improving the Quality of Parameter Estimates in Learning Hierarchy Validation Studies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2025

Alan R. Barton
Alan R. Barton*
Affiliation:
Adelaide College of the Arts and Education
*
Requests for reprints should be sent to Alan R. Barton, Adelaide College of the Arts & Education, Holbrooks Road, Underdale, SOUTH AUSTRALIA 5032.
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Learning hierarchy research has been characterized by the use of ad hoc statistical procedures to determine the validity of postulated hierarchical connections. The two most substantial attempts to legitimize the procedure are due to White & Clark and Dayton & Macready, although both of these methods suffer from serious inadequacies. Data from a number of sources is analyzed using a restricted maximum likelihood estimation procedure and the results are compared with those obtained using the method suggested by Dayton and Macready. Improved estimates are evidenced by an increase in the computed value of the log likelihood function.

Keywords

restricted optimization

Information

Type
Notes and Comments
Information
Psychometrika , Volume 45 , Issue 2 , June 1980, pp. 269 - 271
Copyright
Copyright © 1980 The Psychometric Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Reference Notes

White, R. T. Learning graphical skills in kinematics, 1971, Clayton, Victoria: Monash University.Google Scholar
Linke, R. D. The effects of certain personal and situational variables on the acquisition sequence of graphical interpretation skills, 1973, Clayton, Victoria: Monash University.Google Scholar

References

Beeson, G. W. Hierarchical learning in electrical science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 1977, 14(2), 117–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dayton, C. M. & Macready, G. B. A probabilistic model for validation of behavioral hierarchies. Psychometrika, 1976, 41, 189–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gagné, R. M. & Paradise, N. E. Abilities and learning sets in knowledge acquisition. Psychological Monographs, 1961, 75, (14, Whole No. 518).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
International Mathematical and Statistical Library 3 (4th ed.). Houston: IMSL, 1974.Google Scholar
Linke, R. D. Influence of cultural background on hierarchical learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1974, 66, 911–918.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linke, R. D. Replicative studies in hierarchical learning of graphical interpretation skills. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 1975, 45, 39–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, R. T. The validation of a learning hierarchy. American Educational Research Journal, 1974, 11(2), 121–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, R. T. & Clark, R. M. A test of inclusion which allows for errors of measurement. Psychometrika, 1973, 38, 77–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar