Computerized adaptive testing for classifying examinees into three categories

Educational and Psychological Measurement

Volumn 60, Issue 5, 2000, Pages 713-734

  Eggen, T J H M ^a   Straetmans, G J J M ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0034420139     PISSN: 00131644     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/00131640021970862     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Armitage, P. (1950). Sequential analysis with more than two alternative hypotheses, and its relation to discriminant function analysis. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, B(12), 137-144.
2. Kingsbury, G. G., & Weiss, D. J. (1983). A comparison of IRT-based adaptive mastery testing and a sequential mastery testing procedure. In D. J. Weiss (Ed.), New horizons in testing (pp. 257-286). New York: Academic Press.
3. Kingsbury, G. G., & Zara, A. R. (1989). Procedures for selecting items for computerized adaptive testing. Applied Measurement in Education, 2, 359-375.
4. Kingsbury, G. G., & Zara, A. R. (1991). A comparison of procedures for content-sensitive item selection in computerized adaptive tests. Applied Measurement in Education, 4, 241-261.
5. Lewis, C., & Sheenan, K. (1990). Using Bayesian decision theory to design a computerized mastery test. Applied Psychological Measurement, 14, 376-386.
6. Lord, F. M. (1971). A theoretical study of two-stage testing. Psychometrika, 36, 227-242.
7. Reckase, M. D. (1983). A procedure for decision making using tailored testing. In D. J. Weiss (Ed.), New horizons in testing (pp. 237-255). New York: Academic Press.
8. Sobel, M., & Wald, A. (1949). A sequential decision procedure for choosing one of three hypotheses concerning the unknown mean of a normal distribution. Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 20, 502-522.
9. Spray, J. A. (1993). Multiple-category classification using a sequential probability ratio test (ACT Research Report Series No. 93-7). Iowa City, IA: American College Testing.
10. Spray, J. A., & Reckase, M. D. (1994, April). The selection of test items for decision making with a computer adaptive test. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, New Orleans.
11. Spray, J. A., & Reckase, M. D. (1996). Comparison of SPRT and sequential Bayes procedures for classifying examinees into two categories using a computerized test. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 21, 405-414.
12. Sympson, J. B., & Hetter, R. D. (1985). Controlling item exposure rates in computerized adaptive testing. Proceedings of 27th annual meeting of the Military Testing Association (pp. 973-977). San Diego, CA: Navy Personnel Research and Development Center.
13. Thissen, D., & Mislevy, R. J. (1990). Testing algorithms. In H. Wainer, N.J. Dorans, R. Flaugher, B. F. Green, R. J. Mislevy, L. Steinberg, & D. Thissen (Eds.), Computerized adaptive testing: A primer (pp. 103-134). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
14. Verhelst, N. D., & Glas, C.A.W. (1995). The one-parameter logistic model. In G. H. Fischer & I. W. Molenaar (Eds.), Rasch models: Foundations, recent developments, and applications (pp. 215-237). New York: Springer-Verlag.
15. Verhelst, N. D., Glas, C.A.W., & Verstralen, H.H.F.M. (1995). One-parameter logistic model (OPLM). Arnhem, the Netherlands: Cito.
16. Wainer, H. (1990). Introduction and history. In H. Wainer, N. J. Dorans, R. Flaugher, B. F. Green, R. J. Mislevy, L. Steinberg, & D. Thissen (Eds.), Computerized adaptive testing: A primer (pp. 1-21). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
17. Wald, A. (1947). Sequential analysis. New York: John Wiley.
18. Warm, T. A. (1989). Weighted maximum likelihood estimation of ability in item response theory. Psychometrika, 54, 427-450.
19. Weiss, D. J., & Kingsbury, G. G. (1984). Application of computerized adaptive testing to educational problems. Journal of Educational Measurement, 21, 361-375.