Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

Norming as the group-specific (e.g., age-specific) mapping of raw scores to latent abilities.

While the latent trait or ability is normally distributed in every single age group, the features and shapes of the resulting raw score distributions can change depending on age. As the norm scores are scaled with respect to each separate age-group, they reflect the exceptionality of the test result within a certain age group but do not reflect general developmental changes of the latent ability between age groups.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Fig 2.

Parametric continuous norming.

Known parametric functions are used to model the raw score distributions at specific age levels. The function parameters are subsequently modeled as a function of explanatory variables such as age.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Fig 3.

Semi-parametric continuous norming.

Polynomial regression is applied to model a two-dimensional surface (age x location) in a three-dimensional space (age x location x raw score).

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Fig 4.

Flow chart of the simulation cycles.

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Table 1.

Statistical abbreviations and symbols used in the simulation.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Fig 5.

Age progression of the fictitious ability in the simulated population.

θAge corresponds to the latent ability z-standardized with regard to subjects of exactly the same age and θPop corresponds to the latent ability z-standardized with regard to the total population.

More »

Fig 5 Expand

Fig 6.

RMSE obtained by the different norming methods in the cross-validation sample as a function of scale difficulty (upper panel) and MSD per sample size and difficulty (lower panel).

More »

Fig 6 Expand

Table 2.

RMSE and MSD as functions of sample size n and scale difficulty in the cleaned dataset.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Pairwise comparisons between the methods in the cross-validation based on lowest RMSE.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Fig 7.

RMSE as a function of approach (semi-parametric vs. best parametric), sample size n and scale difficulty.

The solid lines represent the 50th percentile, whereas the dashed lines represent the 25th resp. 75th percentile. This analysis includes all simulation cycles with at least one parametric model with an RMSE < 10.

More »

Fig 7 Expand

Fig 8.

RMSE of the three parametric methods as a function of scale difficulty and sample size n.

The figure includes all models with a RMSE < 10.

More »

Fig 8 Expand

Fig 9.

RMSE as a function of method, scale difficulty, and latent ability for sample size n = 100 (left panel) and n = 250 (right panel).

More »

Fig 9 Expand

Fig 10.

Percentile curves generated with the cNORM package based on the normative sample of a real vocabulary test.

The curves show which raw score (y-axis) is assigned to a specific ability level (each represented by a percentile curve) at a certain age (x-axis). The upper panel shows a deliberately ill-executed norming procedure (31 terms, k = 5, raw score RMSE = 3.33, norm score SE = 0.88), whereas the lower panel depicts an optimally executed procedure (7 terms, k = 4, raw score RMSE = 3.83, norm score SE = 1.11).

More »

Fig 10 Expand