Capitalization on Item Calibration Error in Adaptive Testing

Applied Measurement in Education

Volumn 13, Issue 1, 2000, Pages 35-53

  Van Der Linden, Wim J ^a   Glas, Cees A W ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TWENTE   (Netherlands)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0034406977     PISSN: 08957347     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1207/s15324818ame1301_2     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Chang, H.-H., & Ying, Z. (1996). A global information approach to computerized adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 20, 213-229.
2. Crichton, L. I. (1981). Effect of error in item parameter estimates on adaptive testing. Ann Arbor, MI: UMI Dissertation Information Service.
3. Hambleton, R. K., & Jones, R. W. (1994). Item parameter estimation errors and their influence on test information functions. Applied Measurement in Education, 7, 171-186.
4. Hambleton, R. K., Jones, R. W., & Rogers, H. J. (1993). Influence of item parameter estimation errors in test development. Journal of Educational Measurement, 30, 143-155.
5. Hambleton, R. K., & Swaminathan, H. (1985). Item response theory: Principles and applications. Boston: Kluwer-Nijhoff.
6. Hetter, R. D., & Sympson, J. B. (1997). Item exposure control in CAT-ASVAB. In W. A. Sands, B. K. Waters, & J. R. McBride (Eds.), Computerized adaptive testing: From inquiry to operation (pp. 141-144). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
7. Jones, D. H., & Jin, Z. (1994). Optimal sequential designs for on-line item estimation. Psychometrika, 59, 59-75.
8. Lord, F. M. (1980). Applications of item response theory to practical testing problems. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
9. Lord, F. M. (1983). Small N justifies Rasch model. In D. J. Weiss (Ed.), New horizons in testing: Latent trait theory and computerized adaptive testing. New York: Academic.
10. Lord, F. M., & Novick, M. R. (1968). Statistical theories of mental test scores. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
11. Owen, R. J. (1975). A Bayesian sequential procedure for quantal response in the context of adaptive testing. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 70, 351-356.
12. Stocking, M. L., & Swanson, L. (1993). A method for severely constrained item selection in adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 17, 277-292.
13. Sympson, J. M., & Hetter, R. D. (1985, October). Controlling exposure rates in computerized adaptive testing. Paper presented at the 27th annual conference of the Military Testing Association, San Diego, CA.
14. Thomasson, G. L. (1995, June). New item exposure control algorithms for computerized adaptive testing. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Psychometric Society, Minneapolis, MN.
15. van der Linden, W. J. (1998). Bayesian item selection criteria for adaptive testing. Psychometrika, 63, 210-216.
16. van der Linden, W. J., & Eggen, T. J. H. M. (1986). An empirical Bayes approach to item banking. Applied Psychological Measurement, 10, 345-354.
17. van der Linden, W. J., & Reese, L. M. (1998). A model for optimal constrained adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 22, 259-270.
18. Veerkamp, W. J. J., & Berger, M. P. F. (1997). Some new item selection criteria for adaptive testing. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 22, 203-226.
19. Wainer, H. (Ed.). (1990). Computerized adaptive testing: Primer. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
20. Warm, T. A. (1989). Weighted likelihood estimation of ability in item response theory. Psychometrika, 54, 427-450.