NCLEX® PSYCHOMETRIC

TECHNICAL BRIEF
VOL 2 | FEBRUARY 2005

DEFINITION OF A LOGIT
THOMAS O’NEILL PhD | NCSBN TESTING SERVICES

Figure 1
Logits are a foreign concept to the
general public, so people frequently
ask us, “What is a logit?”

INTRODUCTION

Both the NCLEX-RN and NCLEX-PN are scaled

using Rasch’s (1960) model for dichotomous items,
which uses logits as the unit of measure. As a result,
person ability, item difficulty, and passing standards
are considered on this scale. Yet logits are a foreign
This becomes obvious when one assigns an odds
concept to the general public, so people frequently
ratio to a statement rather than a percentage. The
ask us, “What is a logit?” The simple, but unsatisfy-
difference in odds between 50% (1-to-1 odds) and
ing answer is that “logit” is an abbreviation for “log
54% (1.17-to-1 odds) is quite small. However, when
odds units.” This brief will attempt to explain what are
the four percent increase occurs between 95% (19-
log-odds units and why are they useful?
to-1 odds) and 99% (99-to-1 odds), the change is
dramatic. The change to 99.9% (999-to-1 odds) is
UNEVEN INCREASES even more so. The conversion of a probability to an
odds ratio successfully removes the ceiling effect,
One of the requirements for measurement is that the
but the floor effect remains because odds less than
units be the same size across the full range of the
1-to-1 quickly asymptote toward zero (Figure 2).
continuum being considered. The problem is that
probability is a concept that ranges from infinitely
Figure 2
unlikely to infinitely likely, yet the system used to
represent this idea is constrained to values from 0 to
100 percent. As a result, there are floor and ceiling
effects (Figure 1). These undesirable effects are a
direct consequence of describing an infinite continu-
um using a constrained range. Therefore, the
extreme categories (0% or 100%) are not infinitely
precise, but rather infinitely wide.

1|3
DEFINITION OF A LOGIT
NCLEX® PSYCHOMETRIC TECHNICAL BRIEF | VOL 2 | FEBRUARY 2005

Figure 3
A second problem with an odds ratio is that
differences between odds ratios do not necessarily
mean the same thing. A change from 1 to 1 odds to
9-to-1 odds is a tremendous increase, but the
change from 1001-to-1 odds to 1009-to-1
odds is unnoticeable, yet it still represents an
increase of eight. Therefore, converting these
percentages to an odds ratio is not enough.

Answers to these problems can be found in the early

writings on psychophysics. In 1860, Gustav Fechner
(cited in Gleitman, 1981; source Fechner, 1860)
noted that humans are sensitive to a wide range of 1950s, with psychometricians using conditional prob-
stimulus intensities. In order to compress this wide abilities and these principles to construct measure-
spectrum into a manageable range, the nervous sys- ment systems. Although Rasch’s measurement
tem automatically converts exponential leaps in stim- model conceptually involves more than
ulus into additive steps of perceived magnitude. The understanding log-odds, log-odds are a fundamental
formal expression of Fechner’s law is: element of the model.
S = k log I HOW DOES THIS MEASURE NURSING ABILITY?

in which, It has been demonstrated here that log-odds units

S = the perceived (subjective) change in the
magnitude of the stimulus;
K = a constant;
I = the intensity of the stimulus.
The application of Fechner’s law to the problem of
changes in odds ratios is logical and convenient.
Taking the logarithm of odds ratios converts them
into units that have the same meaning and
removes the floor effect problem (Figure 3).
The logarithm of one is zero, the logarithm of odds
less than one can extend to negative infinity, and the
logarithm of odds greater than one can extend to
positive infinity. The logarithmic transformation of
odds ratios has played an important role in the con-
struction of social science instruments since the late
are a useful unit of probability, but that seems rather
removed from the idea of “nursing ability” which the
NCLEX purports to measure. How are these two
ideas connected?
Using the candidate responses, the difficulty of the
items relative to each other (not relative to the candi-
dates) is assessed. Once the hierarchy of difficulty
for items is established, then the ability of a candi-
date can be described as the point on this item hier-
archy, or continuum, where the candidate has a 50-
50 chance of correctly answering an item. When a
candidate encounters an item that is lower than his
or her ability, then he or she will have a greater than
50-50 chance of answering the item correctly.

2|3 © 2004 NCSBN

DEFINITION OF A LOGIT
NCLEX® PSYCHOMETRIC TECHNICAL BRIEF | VOL 2 | FEBRUARY 2005

Conversely, when a candidate encounters an item

that is higher than his or her ability, then he or she
will have a less than 50-50 chance of answering the
question correctly. The deviation from 50-50 is
governed by the size of the difference between the
person’s ability and the item’s difficulty.
Substantively, a candidate’s ability could be
described by illustrating the type of item that they find
challenging. Nevertheless, NCLEX, like most licen-
sure examinations, continues to use the items
across many administrations and therefore the con-
tent of the items cannot be released.

REFERENCES

Fechner, G. T. (1860). Elemente der Psychophysik,

Leipzig: Breitkopf and Hartel; English translation by H. E.
Adler, 1966, Elements of Psychophysics, Vol. 1, D. H.
Howes and E. G. Borings, (eds.), New York: Holt, Rinehart,
and Winston Inc.

Gleitman H. (1981). Psychology. New York: Norton & Co.

Rasch, G. (1960). Probabilistic Models for Some

Intelligence and Attainment Tests. Copenhagen: Institute of
Educational Research (expanded edition, 1980. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.)

National Council of State Boards of Nursing

111 E. Wacker Drive, Suite 2900
Chicago, IL 60601-4277 USA
312.525.3600 | International Calls: +1.312.525.3600
Testing Services: 866.293.9600 | www.ncsbn.org

3|3