Cumulative models for multiple likert items

I’m fitting an ordinal model with family = cumulative(probit). I’d like the discrimination parameter \alpha to vary across groups (i.e., people in my data) using a hierarchical approach. In your ordinal tutorial (section 3.1.2), you point out how, when using a single-level approach, it’s important to fix the reference group using a combination of the 0 + … syntax and cmc = FALSE. Is that necessary when modeling \alpha with a hierarchical structure?

E.g., would you recommend either of these?

lf(disc ~ 0 + (1 + group), cmc = FALSE)

lf(disc ~ 1 + (1 + group))

I put this here because this is a simplified version of a fuller IRT model where multiple Likert-type items are modeled hierarchically (as opposed to within a multivariate model as explored above). Thus, a fuller version of the formula syntax I’d like to use would be something like

bf(
  y    ~ 1 + (1 |i| item) + (1 |d| id),
  disc ~ 1 + (1 |i| item) + (1 |d| id)
)

I see that code like that also returns a population-level effect for disc_Intercept. My concern is that I was under the impression that I’d want the grand mean to stay fixed at \alpha = 1 when using the family = cumulative(probit).

3 Likes

If you assume the thresholds to be the same across items, then disc can have an intercept. But it may be more sensible to model varying thresholds across items. See ?resp_thres for how to achieve this (requires brms >= 2.11.0).

1 Like

Thank you, @paul.buerkner. This is helpful. Simplifying for a moment, the formula
bf(y | thres(3, gr = item) ~ 1 + (1 | item) + (1 | id)) gives me thresholds varying by item in a fixed-effect way, which is a big improvement from holding them equal. Is there a way to use thres() to partially pool across item?

1 Like

Not with the cumulative family due to the order requirements of the thresholds. Other ordinal families support that via adding a (cs(1) | item). Note that I don’t like the current category specific (cs) syntax for varying effects and might change them to cs(1 | item) at some point.

A new paper by (http://dx.doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.2725) proposes partially pooled thresholds for the cumulative family and a generalization of this method may find its way into brms eventually.

3 Likes

Got it. Thanks Paul!

Just jumping in here to say that that’s a very interesting development. Although I am sure it would be a lot of work.