Cognitive diagnosis models (CDMs) have increasingly been applied in education and other fields. This article provides an overview of a widely used CDM, namely, the G-DINA model, and demonstrates a hands-on example of using multiple R packages for a series of CDM analyses. This overview involves a step-by-step illustration and explanation of performing Q-matrix evaluation, CDM calibration, model fit evaluation, item diagnosticity investigation, classification reliability examination, and the result presentation and visualization. Some limitations of conducting CDM analysis in R are also discussed.

Well-designed spatial assessments can incorporate multiple sources of complexity that reflect important aspects of spatial reasoning. When these aspects are systematically included in spatial reasoning items, researchers can use psychometric models to examine the impact of each aspect on item difficulty. These methods can then help the researchers to understand the nature and development of spatial reasoning and can also inform the development of new items to better reflect the construct. This study investigated sources of item difficulty for object assembly (OA), a format for the assessment of spatial reasoning, by specifying nine item characteristics that were predicted to contribute to item difficulty. We used data from two focal samples including high-ability students in grades 3 to 7 and undergraduate students who responded to 15 newly developed OA items. Results from the linear logistic test model (LLTM) indicated that eight of the nine identified item characteristics significantly contributed to item difficulty. This suggests that an LLTM approach is useful in examining the contributions of various aspects of spatial reasoning to item difficulty and informing item development for spatial reasoning assessments.

Mental rotation is an important aspect of spatial ability. While the importance of measuring mental rotation has been explored, disputes still exist within the literature surrounding sources of item difficulty in mental rotation tests (MRTs). Furthermore, gender differences in MRT performance are often seen but not fully understood. In the current study, we analyzed sources of item difficulty in a set of spatial ability test items using the Linear Logistic Test Model (LLTM). We found that items with more cubes, color differences, and higher rotational complexity tend to be more difficult, whereas items that contain occlusion, a mirrored structure, and a homogenous configuration type tend to be easier. Next, using Differential Component Functioning (DCF) analysis, we analyzed gender differences across these different item characteristics, finding that the number of cubes and color characteristics made questions more difficult for males when compared to females. The results and implications of this study are discussed in further detail.

Childhood experiences and activities, including sports, videogames, and toys, have long been of interest in understanding cognitive development and later individual differences. In particular, the malleability of spatial reasoning suggests that early experiences, including a variety of spatial activities, may have a significant impact on the development of students’ spatial ability skills. In the present study, we sought to update the most widely used spatial activity survey and propose a survey of videogame usage. Both surveys were administered to a large sample of adults with children aged 7 to 14, with a sample (N = 1210) diverse in race, ethnicity, and gender. We explored the survey’s descriptives, scale design, and factor structure to support future use.

In October 2021, the Graduate Student Issues Committee at NCME called their graduate students to create a study group about the current edition of The Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing (Standards). During this study group, we studied eachchapter of the Standards and consulted with different Experts about its content and potential for improvement. After a year of work in this group, we continued writing a statement representing graduate students and young professionals from NCME about our view on the new edition of the Standards. This document presents our views about most of the foundational chapters in the document. We wrote this statement using a democratic process, voting on each of its sections among its contributors, and ratified by the group of graduate students with a 90% percentage of approval (N = 19). In our recommendation, we denounce a reputational debt left by the older generations in our field, the need for a clear anti-racist, decolonizing, and culturally responsive stance in the new edition of the Standards, and a need for a better writing process that can react faster to a changing environment. We also recommend making full use of digital formats now available for consensus documents like the Standards.