Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education

• Abdulaal, M. A. A.-D., Alenazi, M. H., Tajuddin, A. J. A., & Hamidi, B. (2022). Dynamic vs. diagnostic assessment: Impacts on EFL learners’ speaking fluency and accuracy, learning anxiety, and cognitive load. Language Testing in Asia, 12(1), Article 32. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40468-022-00179-0
• Aryadoust, V. (2021). A Cognitive diagnostic assessment study of the listening test of the Singapore-Cambridge general certificate of education o-level: Application of DINA, DINO, G-DINA, HO-DINA, and RRUM. International Journal of Listening, 35(1), 29-52. https://doi.org/10.1080/10904018.2018.1500915
• Barnett, S. M., & Ceci, S. J. (2002). When and where do we apply what we learn?: A taxonomy for far transfer. Psychological Bulletin, 128(4), Article 612. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.128.4.612
• Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7-74. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050102
• Bloom, B. S. (1971). Handbook on formative and summative evaluation of student learning. McGraw-Hill.
• Borsboom, D. (2006). The attack of the psychometricians. Psychometrika, 71(3), 425-440. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-006-1447-6
• Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (2000). How people learn (vol. 11). National Academy Press.
• Brown, A. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(2), 141-178. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0202_2
• Chen, Y.-J. I., Wu, Y.-J., Chen, Y.-H., & Irey, R. (2025). Development and initial validation of the computer-based orthographic processing assessment short form: An application of cognitive diagnostic modeling. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 43(3), 310-327. https://doi.org/10.1177/07342829241304165
• Chin, H., & Chew, C. M. (2022). Online cognitive diagnostic assessment with ordered multiple-choice items for word problems involving ‘time.’ Education and Information Technologies, 27(6), 7721-7748. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-10956-2
• Chin, H., Chew, C. M., & Lim, H. L. (2021a). Development and validation of online cognitive diagnostic assessment with ordered multiple-choice items for ‘multiplication of time.’ Journal of Computers in Education, 8(2), 289-316. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-020-00180-7
• Chin, H., Chew, C. M., & Lim, H. L. (2021b). Incorporating feedback in online cognitive diagnostic assessment for enhancing grade five students’ achievement in ‘time.’ Journal of Computers in Education, 8(2), 183-212. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-020-00176-3
• Collins, A. (1992). Toward a design science of education. In E. Scanlon, & T. O’Shea (Eds.), New directions in educational technology (pp. 15-22). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-77750-9_2
• Cui, Y., Gierl, M., & Guo, Q. (2016). Statistical classification for cognitive diagnostic assessment: An artificial neural network approach. Educational Psychology, 36(6), 1065-1082. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2015.1062078
• Da Silva, M. A., Liu, R., Huggins-Manley, A. C., & Bazán, J. L. (2019). Incorporating the Q-matrix into multidimensional item response theory models. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 79(4), 665-687. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164418814898
• de la Torre, J. (2011). The generalized DINA model framework. Psychometrika, 76(2), 179-199. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-011-9207-7
• Delafontaine, J., Chen, C., Park, J. Y., & Van Den Noortgate, W. (2022). Using country-specific Q-matrices for cognitive diagnostic assessments with international large-scale data. Large-Scale Assessments in Education, 10(1), Article 19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40536-022-00138-4
• Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
• Hu, T., Yang, J., Wu, R., & Wu, X. (2021). An international comparative study of students’ scientific explanation based on cognitive diagnostic assessment. Frontiers in Psychology, 12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.795497
• Huang, R., Liu, Z., Zi, D., Huang, Q., & Pan, S. (2022). A multi-level remedial teaching design based on cognitive diagnostic assessment: Taking the electromagnetic induction as an example. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.851378
• Hung, S.-P., & Huang, H.-Y. (2019). A sequential process model for cognitive diagnostic assessment with repeated attempts. Applied Psychological Measurement, 43(7), 495-511. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621618813111
• Jia, B., Zhu, Z., & Gao, H. (2021). International comparative study of statistics learning trajectories based on PISA data on cognitive diagnostic models. Frontiers in Psychology, 12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.657858
• Jiang, B., Li, X., Yang, S., Kong, Y., Cheng, W., Hao, C., & Lin, Q. (2022). Data-driven personalized learning path planning based on cognitive diagnostic assessments in MOOCs. Applied Sciences, 12(8), 3982. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12083982
• Kang, C., Yang, Y., & Zeng, P. (2019). Q-matrix refinement based on item fit statistic RMSEA. Applied Psychological Measurement, 43(7), 527-542. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621618813104
• Köhn, H.-F., & Chiu, C.-Y. (2019). Attribute hierarchy models in cognitive diagnosis: Identifiability of the latent attribute space and conditions for completeness of the Q-matrix. Journal of Classification, 36(3), 541-565. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00357-018-9278-6
• Kuo, B.-C., Chen, C.-H., Yang, C.-W., & Mok, M. M. C. (2016). Cognitive diagnostic models for tests with multiple-choice and constructed-response items. Educational Psychology, 36(6), 1115-1133. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2016.1166176
• Le, V., Nissen, J. M., Tang, X., Zhang, Y., Mehrabi, A., Morphew, J. W., Chang, H. H., & Van Dusen, B. (2025). Applying cognitive diagnostic models to mechanics concept inventories. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 21, Article 010103. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.21.010103
• Leighton, J. P., & Chu, M.-W. (2016). First among equals: Hybridization of cognitive diagnostic assessment and evidence-centered game design. International Journal of Testing, 16(2), 164-180. https://doi.org/10.1080/15305058.2015.1107075
• Leighton, J., & Gierl, M. (2007). Cognitive diagnostic assessment for education: Theory and applications. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511611186
• Li, Y., Zhen, M., & Liu, J. (2021). Validating a reading assessment within the cognitive diagnostic assessment framework: Q-matrix construction and model comparisons for different primary grades. Frontiers in Psychology, 12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.786612
• Lin, Q., Xing, K., & Park, Y. S. (2020). Measuring skill growth and evaluating change: Unconditional and conditional approaches to latent growth cognitive diagnostic models. Frontiers in Psychology, 11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.02205
• Ma, W., & de la Torre, J. (2020). An empirical Q-matrix validation method for the sequential generalized DINA model. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 73(1), 142-163. https://doi.org/10.1111/bmsp.12156
• Maas, L., Brinkhuis, M. J. S., Kester, L., & Wijngaards-de Meij, L. (2022). Cognitive diagnostic assessment in university statistics education: Valid and reliable skill measurement for actionable feedback using learning dashboards. Applied Sciences, 12(10), Article 4809. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12104809
• Madison, M. J., & Bradshaw, L. P. (2015). The effects of Q-matrix design on classification accuracy in the log-linear cognitive diagnosis model. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 75(3), 491-511. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164414539162
• Mei, H., & Chen, H. (2022). Assessing students’ translation competence: Integrating China’s standards of English with cognitive diagnostic assessment approaches. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.872025
• Meng, Y., Wang, Y., & Zhao, N. (2023). Cognitive diagnostic assessment of EFL learners’ listening barriers through incorrect responses. Frontiers in Psychology, 14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1126106
• Messick, S. (1989). Validity. In R. L. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement (3rd ed., pp. 13-103). Macmillan Publishing Co, Inc; American Council on Education.
• Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & PRISMA Group. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. BMJ, 339, Article b2535. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.b2535
• Nájera, P., Sorrel, M. A., & Abad, F. J. (2019). Reconsidering cutoff points in the general method of empirical Q-matrix validation. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 79(4), 727-753. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164418822700
• Panic, N., Leoncini, E., de Belvis, G., Ricciardi, W., & Boccia, S. (2013). Evaluation of the endorsement of the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (PRISMA) statement on the quality of published systematic review and meta-analyses. PLoS ONE, 8(12), Article e83138. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0083138
• Park, Y. S., Xing, K., & Lee, Y.-S. (2018). Explanatory cognitive diagnostic models: Incorporating latent and observed predictors. Applied Psychological Measurement, 42(5), 376-392. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621617738012
• Paulsen, J., & Valdivia, D. S. (2022). Examining cognitive diagnostic modeling in classroom assessment conditions. The Journal of Experimental Education, 90(4), 916-933. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.2021.1891008
• Pellegrino, J. W., Chudowsky, N., & Glaser, R. (2001). Knowing, learning, and instruction. National Academy Press.
• Qin, H., & Guo, L. (2023). Using machine learning to improve Q-matrix validation. Behavior Research Methods, 56(3), 1916-1935. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-023-02126-0
• Ranjbaran, F., & Alavi, S. M. (2017). Developing a reading comprehension test for cognitive diagnostic assessment: A RUM analysis. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 55, 167-179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2017.10.007
• Ravand, H., & Robitzsch, A. (2018). Cognitive diagnostic model of best choice: A study of reading comprehension. Educational Psychology, 38(10), 1255-1277. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2018.1489524
• Ren, H., Xu, N., Lin, Y., Zhang, S., & Yang, T. (2021). Remedial teaching and learning from a cognitive diagnostic model perspective: Taking the data distribution characteristics as an example. Frontiers in Psychology, 12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.628607
• Shih, S.-C., Kuo, B.-C., & Lee, S.-J. (2019). An online game-based computational estimation assessment combining cognitive diagnostic model and strategy analysis. Educational Psychology, 39(10), 1255-1277. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2018.1501468
• Siddaway, A. P., Wood, A. M., & Hedges, L. V. (2019). How to do a systematic review: A best practice guide for conducting and reporting narrative reviews, meta-analyses, and meta-syntheses. Annual Review of Psychology, 70, 747-770. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010418-102803
• Skaggs, G., Hein, S. F., & Wilkins, J. L. M. (2016). Diagnostic profiles: A standard setting method for use with a cognitive diagnostic model. Journal of Educational Measurement, 53(4), 448-458. https://doi.org/10.1111/jedm.12125
• Tao, J., Zhao, W., Liu, F., Guo, X., Cheng, N., Guo, Q., Xu, X., & Duan, H. (2024). Cognitive diagnosis method via q-matrix-embedded neural networks. Applied Sciences, 14(22), Article 10380. https://doi.org/10.3390/app142210380
• Tatsuoka, K. K. (2009). Cognitive assessment: An introduction to the rule space method. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203883372
• Templin, J. L., & Henson, R. A. (2006). Measurement of psychological disorders using cognitive diagnosis models. Psychological Methods, 11(3), Article 287. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.11.3.287
• Templin, J. L., & Henson, R. A. (2010). Diagnostic measurement: Theory, methods, and applications. Guilford Press.
• Tian, W., Zhang, J., Peng, Q., & Yang, X. (2020). Q-matrix designs of longitudinal diagnostic classification models with hierarchical attributes for formative assessment. Frontiers in Psychology, 11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01694
• Toprak-Yildiz, T. E. (2021). An international comparison using cognitive diagnostic assessment: Fourth graders’ diagnostic profile of reading skills on PIRLS 2016. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 70, Article 101057. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2021.101057
• Tu, D., Wang, S., Cai, Y., Douglas, J., & Chang, H.-H. (2019). Cognitive diagnostic models with attribute hierarchies: Model estimation with a restricted Q-matrix design. Applied Psychological Measurement, 43(4), 255-271. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621618765721
• Wang, W.-C., & Qiu, X.-L. (2019). Multilevel modeling of cognitive diagnostic assessment: The multilevel DINA example. Applied Psychological Measurement, 43(1), 34-50. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621618765713
• Wedel, A., Müller, C. R., & Greiner, F. (2022). Diagnostic cases in pre-service teacher education: Effects of text characteristics and empathy on text-based cognitive models. Educational Psychology, 42(6), 694-713. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2022.2047615
• Wu, H.-M. (2019). Online individualised tutor for improving mathematics learning: A cognitive diagnostic model approach. Educational Psychology, 39(10), 1218-1232. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2018.1494819
• Wu, X., Wu, R., Chang, H.-H., Kong, Q., & Zhang, Y. (2020). International comparative study on PISA mathematics achievement test based on cognitive diagnostic models. Frontiers in Psychology, 11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.02230
• Wu, X., Xu, T., & Zhang, Y. (2023). Research on the data analysis knowledge assessment of pre-service teachers from China based on cognitive diagnostic assessment. Current Psychology, 42(6), 4885-4899. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-01836-y
• Wu, X., Zhang, Y., Wu, R., & Chang, H.-H. (2022). A comparative study on cognitive diagnostic assessment of mathematical key competencies and learning trajectories: PISA data analysis based on 19, 454 Students from 8 countries. Current Psychology, 41(11), 7854-7866. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-020-01230-0
• Yamaguchi, K., & Okada, K. (2018). Comparison among cognitive diagnostic models for the TIMSS 2007 fourth grade mathematics assessment. PLoS ONE, 13(2), Article e0188691. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0188691
• Zhou, S., & Traynor, A. (2022). Measuring students’ learning progressions in energy using cognitive diagnostic models. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.892884
• Zhu, Z. (2023). International comparative study of learning trajectories based on TIMSS 2019 G4 data on cognitive diagnostic models. Frontiers in Psychology, 14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1241656

APA

Herliana, F., Halim, A., Andriani, R., Yasin, B., & Mailizar (2026). Cognitive diagnostic assessment in educational contexts: Global trends, methodological innovations, and emerging direction. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 22(2), em2775. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/17827

Vancouver

Herliana F, Halim A, Andriani R, Yasin B, Mailizar. Cognitive diagnostic assessment in educational contexts: Global trends, methodological innovations, and emerging direction. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2026;22(2):em2775. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/17827

AMA

Herliana F, Halim A, Andriani R, Yasin B, Mailizar. Cognitive diagnostic assessment in educational contexts: Global trends, methodological innovations, and emerging direction. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2026;22(2), em2775. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/17827

Chicago

Herliana, Fitria, A. Halim, Riza Andriani, Burhanuddin Yasin, and Mailizar. "Cognitive diagnostic assessment in educational contexts: Global trends, methodological innovations, and emerging direction". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education 2026 22 no. 2 (2026): em2775. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/17827

Harvard

Herliana, F., Halim, A., Andriani, R., Yasin, B., and Mailizar (2026). Cognitive diagnostic assessment in educational contexts: Global trends, methodological innovations, and emerging direction. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 22(2), em2775. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/17827

MLA

Herliana, Fitria et al. "Cognitive diagnostic assessment in educational contexts: Global trends, methodological innovations, and emerging direction". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, vol. 22, no. 2, 2026, em2775. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/17827