CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 12Psychometric Methodologies and TestingCognitive Abilities and TestingPsychological Testing and Assessment

A Psychometric Analysis of Raven’s Colored Progressive Matrices: Evaluating Guessing and Carelessness Using the 4PL Item Response Theory Model

Open access
Antoniou, Faye, Alkhadim, Ghadah, Mouzaki, Angeliki, Simos, Panagiotis·2022·Journal of Intelligence
DOI 10.3390/jintelligence10010006PMC PMC8883956
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of Raven’s colored progressive matrices by estimating the presence of pseudo-guessing and pseudo-carelessness. Participants were 1127 children from ages 5 to 11. Guessing and carelessness were assessed using the lower and upper asymptotes of the 3PL and 4PL item response theory (IRT) models, respectively. Optimal model fit was judged using difference loglikelihood tests and information criteria. Results indicated that guessing, but not carelessness, were evident in the AB and B forms of the CPM, with successful guessing being more prevalent in the AB form. It is concluded that nonverbal IQ estimation in CPM should include variable estimation methods so that aptitude scores are estimated with the highest possible accuracy.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/jintelligence10010006

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 31

  1. Abad Francisco Colom Roberto Rebollo Irene Escorial Sergio Sex differential item functioning in the Raven’s Advanced Progressive Matrices: Evidence for bias Personality and Individual Differences 2004 36 1459 70 10.1016/S0191-8869(03)00241-1 · DOI
  2. Akaike Hirotugu A new look at the statistical model identification IEEE Transactions on Automated Control 1974 19 716 23 10.1109/TAC.1974.1100705 · DOI · Paper page
  3. Birnbaum Alfred Some latent trait models and their use in inferring an examinee’s ability Statistical Theories of Mental Test Scores Lord F. M. Novick M. R. Addison-Wesley Reading 1968
  4. Burnham Kenneth Anderson David Model Selection and Multimodel Inference Springer New York 2002
  5. Facon Bruno Magis David Nuchadee Marie-Laure Boeck Paul de Do Raven’s colored progressive matrices function in the same way in typical and clinical populations? Insights from the intellectual disability field Intelligence 2011 39 281 91 10.1016/j.intell.2011.04.002 · DOI
  6. Goharpey Hahal Crewther David Crewther Sheila Problem solving ability in children with intellectual disability as measured by the Raven’s colored progressive matrices Research in Developmental Disabilities 2013 34 4366 74 10.1016/j.ridd.2013.09.013 24139715 · DOI
  7. Karabatsos George Comparing the aberrant response detection performance of thirty-six person-fit statistics Applied Measurement in Education 2003 16 277 98 10.1207/S15324818AME1604_2 · DOI
  8. Kilburn Robert Sanderson Jay Melton Keith Relation of the Raven Coloured Progressive Matrices to two measures of verbal ability in a sample of mildly retarded hospital patients Psychological Reports 1966 19 731 34 10.2466/pr0.1966.19.3.731 5981073 · DOI
  9. Leong Siow Hoo Ling Siew Eng Mahdi Rasidah Moderating ability of item response theory through prior guessing parameter Journal of Mathematics and Statistics 2013 9 277 82 10.3844/jmssp.2013.277.282 · DOI
  10. Liao Wen-Wei Ho Rong-Guey Yen Yung-Chin Cheng Hsu-Chen The four-parameter logistic item response theory model as a robust method of estimating ability despite aberrant responses Social Behavior and Personality 2012 40 1679 94 10.2224/sbp.2012.40.10.1679 · DOI
  11. Linacre Mike Item discrimination, guessing and carelessness asymptotes: Estimating IRT parameters with Rasch Rasch Measurement Transactions 2004 18 959 60
  12. Loken Eric Rulison Kelly Estimation of a four-parameter item response theory model British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology 2010 63 509 25 10.1348/000711009X474502 20030965 · DOI
  13. Mackintosh Nicholas John Sex Differences and IQ Journal of Biosocial Science 1996 28 558 71 10.1017/S0021932000022586 8973009 · DOI
  14. Magis David A note on the item information function of the four-parameter logistic model Applied Psychological Measurement 2013 37 304 15 10.1177/0146621613475471 · DOI
  15. Masyn Kathryn Latent class analysis and finite mixture modeling The Oxford Handbook of Quantitative Methods in Psychology Little T. D. Oxford University Press New York 2013 2 551 611
  16. Mislevy Robert Bock Darrell Biweight estimates of latent ability Educational and Psychological Measurement 1982 42 725 37 10.1177/001316448204200302 · DOI
  17. Osgood D. Wayne Morris Barbara Potenza Maria Analyzing multiple-item measures of crime and deviance I: Item response theory scaling Journal of Quantitative Criminology 2002 18 267 96 10.1023/A:1016008004010 · DOI
  18. Prabhakaran Vivek Smith Jennifer Desmond John Glover Gary Gabrieli John Neural substrates of fluid reasoning: An fMRI study of neocortical activation during performance of the Raven’s Progressive Matrices Test Cognitive Psychology 1997 33 43 63 10.1006/cogp.1997.0659 9212721 · DOI
  19. Pueyo Roser Junque Carme Vendrell Pere Narberhaus Ana Segarra Dolors Raven’s coloured progressive matrices as a measure of cognitive functioning in cerebral palsy Journal of Intellectual Disability Research 2008 52 437 45 10.1111/j.1365-2788.2008.01045.x 18312310 · DOI
  20. Raftery A. E. Bayesian model selection in social research Sociological Methodology 1995 25 111 63 10.2307/271063 · DOI · Paper page
  21. Reise Steven Waller Neils How many IRT parameters does it take to model psychopathology items? Psychological Methods 2003 8 164 84 10.1037/1082-989X.8.2.164 12924813 · DOI
  22. Rulison Kelly Loken Eric I’ve fallen and I can’t get up: Can high ability students recover from early mistakes in computerized adaptive testing? Applied Psychological Measurement 2009 33 83 101 10.1177/0146621608324023 20953275 PMC2954515 · DOI
  23. Rupp Andreas Item response modeling with BILOG-MG and MULTILOG for Windows International Journal of Testing 2003 3 365 84 10.1207/S15327574IJT0304_5 · DOI
  24. Savage-McGlynn E. Sex differences in intelligence in younger and older participants of the Raven’s standard progressive matrices plus Personality and Individual Differences 2012 53 137 41 10.1016/j.paid.2011.06.013 · DOI
  25. Swaminathan Hariharan Gifford Janice Bayesian estimation in the three-parameter logistic model Psychometrika 1986 51 589 601 10.1007/BF02295598 · DOI
  26. Tendeiro Jorge Meijer Rob Niessen Susan PerFit: An R package for person-fit analysis in IRT Journal of Statistical Software 2016 74 1 27 10.18637/jss.v074.i05 · DOI
  27. Van der Flier H. Deviant response patterns and comparability of test scores Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 1982 13 267 98 10.1177/0022002182013003001 · DOI
  28. Van Herwegen Jo Farran Emily Annaz Dagmara Item and error analysis on Raven’s coloured progressive matrices in Williams syndrome Research in Developmental Disabilities 2011 32 93 99 10.1016/j.ridd.2010.09.005 20971610 · DOI
  29. Vandekerckhove Joachim Matzke Dora Wagenmakers Eric Model comparison and the principle of parsimony The Oxford Handbook of Computational and Mathematical Psychology Busemeyer Jerome Wang Zheng Townsend James Eidels Ami Oxford Library of Psychology Oxford 2015 300 19
  30. Waller Neils Feuerstahler Leah Bayesian modal estimation of the four-parameter item response model in real, realistic, and idealized data sets Multivariate Behavioral Research 2017 52 350 70 10.1080/00273171.2017.1292893 28306347 · DOI
  31. Zumbo Bruno Three generations of DIF analyses: Considering where it has been, where it is now, and where it is going Language Assessment Quarterly 2007 4 223 33 10.1080/15434300701375832 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Antoniou, F., Alkhadim, G., Mouzaki, A., & Simos, P.
Affiliations
  • National and Kapodistrian University of Athens (GR)
  • Taif University (SA)
  • University of Crete (GR)
Corresponding author
Antoniou, Faye
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Intelligence
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2022-01-25
Volume
10
Issue
1
Pages
6
ISSN
2079-3200 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3390/jintelligence10010006
PMC
PMC8883956
OpenAlex
W4210784552
Cited by
12
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3
FWCI
1.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Intelligence (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Taif University (TURSP-2020/334)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Psychological Testing and Assessment
Keywords
Coloured Progressive Matrices, guessing, carelessness, children, item response theory, model fit

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review