Literature DB >> 12386393

Maintaining Content Validity in Computerized Adaptive Testing.

Richard M. Luecht1, André De Champlain, Ronald J. Nungester.   

Abstract

A major advantage of using computerized adaptive testing (CAT) is improved measurement efficiency; better score reliability or mastery decisions can result from targeting item selections to the abilities of examinees. However, this type of engineering solution can result in differential content for different examinees at various levels of ability. This paper empirically demonstrates some of the trade-offs which can occur when content balancing is imposed in CAT forms or conversely, when it is ignored. That is, the content validity of a CAT form can actually change across a score scale when content balancing is ignored. On the other hand, efficiency and score precision can be severely reduced by over specifying content restrictions in a CAT form. The results from two simulation studies are presented as a means of highlighting some of the trade-offs that could occur between content and statistical considerations in CAT form assembly.

Year:  1998        PMID: 12386393     DOI: 10.1023/A:1009789314011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract        ISSN: 1382-4996            Impact factor:   3.853


  3 in total

1.  Methodological issues for building item banks and computerized adaptive scales.

Authors:  David Thissen; Bryce B Reeve; Jakob Bue Bjorner; Chih-Hung Chang
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2007-02-10       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  A Comparison of Content-Balancing Procedures for Estimating Multiple Clinical Domains in Computerized Adaptive Testing: Relative Precision, Validity, and Detection of Persons With Misfitting Responses.

Authors:  Barth B Riley; Michael L Dennis; Kendon J Conrad
Journal:  Appl Psychol Meas       Date:  2009-12-16

Review 3.  Measurement properties of the Dutch-Flemish patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) physical function item bank and instruments: a systematic review.

Authors:  Inger L Abma; Bas J D Butje; Peter M Ten Klooster; Philip J van der Wees
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2021-02-24       Impact factor: 3.186

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.