Pivot anchoring 
There is usually no problem defining the item difficulty of a standard dichotomous (right/wrong) item. It is the location on the latent variable where there is a 50% chance of success on the item.
Combining dichotomous items makes a polytomous superitem. But how do we define the difficulty of a superitem? Since the difficulty of a dichotomous item is the location on the latent variable where the top and bottom categories are equally probably (= 0.5), we apply the same logic to the superitem. Its difficulty is the location on the latent variable where the top and bottom categories are equally probably (= ?). But this definition does not make sense in every situation. So we may need to choose another definition.
For instance, if a superitem is a combination of 3 dichotomous items (so that its possible scores = 0,1,2,3) , we might define its difficulty as the location on the latent variable where the expected score on the superitem is 1.5. Or the location on the latent variable where scores of 1 and 2 are equally probable. Or the location on the latent variable where the expected score is 1.0 or maybe 2.0. Or .....
For these alternative definitions, we need to compute the distance of the chosen location from the standard location and then apply that distance to the item difficulty using "pivot anchoring" implemented in Winsteps with SAFILE=. We can usually discover the distance we want by looking at the GRFILE= output.
The procedure is:
(1) Analyze the data without pivotanchoring
(2) Output SFILE=sf.txt which contains the standard Andrich thresholds
(3) Output GRFILE=gr.txt which contains the values connected with all the scores and probabilities on the item
(4) Identify the logit value corresponding to the desired location on the latent variable = M
(5) Subtract M from all the values for the superitem in SFILE=sf.txt
(6) The adjusted SFILE= is now specified as SAFILE=sf.txt, the pivotanchor file
(7) Analyze the data with pivotanchoring
( The difficulty of the superitem should now have changed by the specified value, M
Pivots are the locations in the dichotomy, rating (or partial credit) scale at which the categories would be dichotomized, i.e., the place that indicates the transition from "bad" to "good", "unhealthy" to "healthy". Ordinarily the pivot is placed at the point where the highest and lowest categories of the response structure are equally probable. Pivot anchoring redefines the item measures. The effect of pivot anchoring is to move the reported difficulty of an item relative to its rating scale structure. It makes no change to the fit of the data to the model or to the expected observation corresponding to each actual observation.
Dr. Rita Bode's procedure works well. The idea is to align the item difficulties so that the cutpoint for each item (equivalent to the dichotomous item difficulty) is located at the reported item difficulty on the latent variable. So, we do an arithmetic sleight of hand. In the original analysis, we look at a Table such as Table 2.2 and see where along the line (row) for each item is the substantive cutpoint (passfail point, benchmark, etc.) We note down its measure value on the latent variable (xaxis of Table 2.2).
Then, for each item, we compare the measure value new item difficulty with its reported item difficulty. The difference is the amount we need to shift the Andrich thresholds for that item. Here is the computation:
New average thresholds (excluding bottom "0") = Old item difficulty + Old average thresholds (excluding bottom "0")  Provisional New item difficulty
If the analysis is unanchored, Winsteps will maintain the average difficulty of the items:
New item difficulty = Provisional New item difficulty  Average(Provisional New item difficulty) + Average(Old item difficulty)
Person measures with complete response strings will usually have very small or no changes.
Since this can become confusing. It is usually easiest to :
1) output the SFILE= from the original analysis to Excel.
2) add (item difficulty  cutpoint) to the threshold values for each item. Example: we want to subtract 1 logit from the item difficulty to move the item difficulty to the cutpoint on the latent variable. We add 1 logit to all the thresholds for an item, then Winsteps will subtract 1 logit from the item's difficulty.
3) Copyandpaste the Excel SFILE= values into the Winsteps control file between SAFILE=* and *
4) Since each item now has different threshold values: ISGROUPS=0
5) This procedure should make no change to the person measures.
In Rita Bode's approach, we have a target item difficulty ordering. Usually most items are already in that order, but a few items are out of order. These outoforder item need to be pivotanchored to place them correctly in the item hierarchy.
i) Output Table 13, the original ordering of the items.
ii) Move the item rows up and down to give the desired ordering.
iii) For items that are already in order (usually more than half the items), there is no change to SFILE= in the SAFILE=.
iv) For the other items, change the SFILE= values enough to locate those items in the correct position. Example, to increase the item difficulty by one logit, decrease the thresholds from the SAFILE= to the SAFILE= by one logit.
See also SAFILE=. PIVOT= was an earlier, unsuccessful attempt to automate this procedure.
For polytomies:
1) from your original analysis, with your GROUPS= (if any) and no SAFILE=, output an SFILE=
2) build an SAFILE=
a) for each item, use the SFILE= value for its group
b) add the pivot anchor value to the SFILE= value
c) include the new set of values for the item in the SAFILE=. There must be entries in SAFILE= for every item. Use the SFILE= values directly if there is no change
Example 1: SFILE= for the group with item 1:
1 0 .00
1 1 .85
1 2 .85
We want to add one logit for item 1, two logits for item 2, no change for item 3
SAFILE=*
1 0 1.00 ; this is a placeholder, but is convenient to remind us of the pivot value
1 1 0.15
1 2 1.85
2 0 2.00
2 1 2.15
2 2 2.85
3 0 0.00
3 1 .85
3 2 0.85
*
3) do the analysis again with ISGROUPS=0 and SAFILE=* ... *
4) The person measures will shift by the average of the pivot values.
Example 2: We can plot the IRF/ICC ogives for every PCM item on a graph. This gives a complete story of expected responses on all the items for each person on the xaxis, but it does not gives us a useful depiction of the latent variable. When explaining the latent variable in terms of an item hierarchy, we need to take a horizontal slice across all the PCM ICCs/IRFs somewhere around the middle of the rating scale. Pivot anchoring lets us do this.
For instance, the rating scale may be a Likert scale from 1 to 5 with 4=Agree. We may decide that the "pivot" point on the IRF of each item is where the expected score = 4 (which is also the point where category 4=Agree has the highest probability of being observed). So we need to redefine the item difficulty of each PCM item away from its default value (the location where the highest and lowest categories are equal probable) to the location where the expected score on the item = 4. We do this using pivotanchoring. Here is the procedure:
1. Do a standard PCM analysis (ISGROUPS=0). For each item, Table 3.2, etc., reports the item difficulty + Andrich threshoolds: Di + {Fij}
2. Output IFILE= the item difficulty for each item = Di. Example: D=2.5 logits
3. Output ISFILE= the location on the latent variable where the expected score on the item is 4 = Ei. Example Ei = 3.0 logits
4. Compute the desired shift of location for each item = Ei  Di = 3.02.5 = 0.5 logits
5. Output SFILE= the Andrich thresholds (relative to the item difficulties) for each item = {Fij}. Example: 2, 1, 0, 3
6. Subtract the shift from the Andrich thresholds {Sij} = {Fij (Ei  Di)}. Example: {Sij} = 2.5, 1.5, 0.5, 2.5
7. Anchor (fix) the Andrich thresholds SAFILE= for each item at their {Sij} values.
8. Rerun the analysis. Item difficulties, D'i, are now located at the points where the expected scores on the items are 4.
Example: Di + Fij = D'i + Sij for each threshold of each item. In our example:
D'i = Di + Fij  Sij = 2.5 + {2, 1, 0, 3}  {2.5, 1.5, 0.5, 2.5} = 2.5 + {0.5, 0.5, 0.5, 0.5} = 3.0, the desired location.
Help for Winsteps Rasch Measurement Software: www.winsteps.com. Author: John Michael Linacre
For more information, contact info@winsteps.com or use the Contact Form
Facets Rasch measurement software.
Buy for $149. & site licenses.
Freeware student/evaluation download Winsteps Rasch measurement software. Buy for $149. & site licenses. Freeware student/evaluation download 

Stateoftheart : singleuser and site licenses : free student/evaluation versions : download immediately : instructional PDFs : user forum : assistance by email : bugs fixed fast : free update eligibility : backwards compatible : money back if not satisfied Rasch, Winsteps, Facets online Tutorials 

Forum  Rasch Measurement Forum to discuss any Raschrelated topic 
Click here to add your email address to the Winsteps and Facets email list for notifications.
Click here to ask a question or make a suggestion about Winsteps and Facets software.
Coming Raschrelated Events  

Jan. 5  Feb. 2, 2018, Fri.Fri.  Online workshop: Practical Rasch Measurement  Core Topics (E. Smith, Winsteps), www.statistics.com 
Jan. 1016, 2018, Wed.Tues.  Inperson workshop: Advanced Course in Rasch Measurement Theory and the application of RUMM2030, Perth, Australia (D. Andrich), Announcement 
Jan. 1719, 2018, Wed.Fri.  Rasch Conference: Seventh International Conference on Probabilistic Models for Measurement, Matilda Bay Club, Perth, Australia, Website 
Jan. 2224, 2018, MonWed.  Inperson workshop: Rasch Measurement for Everybody en español (A. Tristan, Winsteps), San Luis Potosi, Mexico. www.ieia.com.mx 
April 1012, 2018, Tues.Thurs.  Rasch Conference: IOMW, New York, NY, www.iomw.org 
April 1317, 2018, Fri.Tues.  AERA, New York, NY, www.aera.net 
May 22  24, 2018, Tues.Thur.  EALTA 2018 preconference workshop (Introduction to Rasch measurement using WINSTEPS and FACETS, Thomas Eckes & Frank WeissMotz), https://ealta2018.testdaf.de 
May 25  June 22, 2018, Fri.Fri.  Online workshop: Practical Rasch Measurement  Core Topics (E. Smith, Winsteps), www.statistics.com 
June 27  29, 2018, Wed.Fri.  Measurement at the Crossroads: History, philosophy and sociology of measurement, Paris, France., https://measurement2018.sciencesconf.org 
June 29  July 27, 2018, Fri.Fri.  Online workshop: Practical Rasch Measurement  Further Topics (E. Smith, Winsteps), www.statistics.com 
July 25  July 27, 2018, Wed.Fri.  PacificRim Objective Measurement Symposium (PROMS), (Preconference workshops July 2324, 2018) Fudan University, Shanghai, China "Applying Rasch Measurement in Language Assessment and across the Human Sciences" www.promsociety.org 
Aug. 10  Sept. 7, 2018, Fri.Fri.  Online workshop: ManyFacet Rasch Measurement (E. Smith, Facets), www.statistics.com 
Sept. 3  6, 2018, Mon.Thurs.  IMEKO World Congress, Belfast, Northern Ireland www.imeko2018.org 
Oct. 12  Nov. 9, 2018, Fri.Fri.  Online workshop: Practical Rasch Measurement  Core Topics (E. Smith, Winsteps), www.statistics.com 
Our current URL is www.winsteps.com
Winsteps^{®} is a registered trademark
Concerned about aches, pains, youthfulness? Mike and Jenny suggest Liquid Biocell 
