Measuring human intelligence with artificial intelligence: Adaptive item generation

Cognition and Intelligence: Identifying the Mechanisms of the Mind

Volumn , Issue , 2004, Pages 251-267

  Embretson, Susan E ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 34248222481     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511607073.014     Document Type: Chapter

References (37)

1. Adams, R. A., Wilson, M., & Wang, W. C. (1997). The multidimensional random coefficients multinomial logit model. Applied Psychological Measurement, 21, 1-23.
2. Bejar, I.I. (1996). Generative response modeling: Leveraging the computer as a test delivery medium (RR-96-13). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
3. Bejar, I. I., Lawless, R. R., Morley, M. E., Wagner, M. E., Bennett, R. E., & Revuelta, J. (2002). A feasibility study ofon-the-fly item generation in adaptive testing (GRE Board Research Report 98-12). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
4. Butterfield, E. C., Nielsen, D., Tangen, K. L., & Richardson, M. B. (1985). Theoretically based psychometric measures of inductive reasoning. In S. E. Embretson (Ed.), Test design: Developments in psychology and psychometrics(pp. 77-147). New York: Academic Press.
5. Carpenter, P. A., Just, M. A., & Shell, P. (1990). What one intelligence test measures: A theoretical account of processing in the Raven's Progressive Matrices Test. Psychological Review, 97, 404-431.
6. Carroll, J. B. (1976). Psychometric tasks as cognitive tests: A new structure of intellect. In L. Resnick (Ed.), The nature of intelligence(pp. 27-56). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
7. Carroll, J. B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor-analytic studies. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
8. Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52, 281-302.
9. DiBello, L. V., Stout, W. F., & Roussos, L. (1995). Unified cognitive psychometric assessment likelihood-based classification techniques. In P. D. Nichols, S. F. Chipman, & R. L. Brennan (Eds.), Cognitively diagnostic assessment(pp. 361-389). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
10. Diehl, K. A. (1998). Using cognitive theory and item response theory to extract information from wrong responses.Unpublished Master's thesis, University of Kansas.
11. Diehl, K. A. (2002). Algorithmic item generation and problem solving strategies in matrix completion problems. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Kansas.
12. Diehl, K. A., & Embretson, S. E. (2002). Impact of perceptual features on algorithmic item generation for matrix completion problems. Technical Report 02-0100. Cognitive Measurement Reports. Lawrence, University of Kansas.
13. Embretson, S. E. (1983). Construct validity: Construct representation versus nomothetic span. Psychological Bulletin, 93,179-197.
14. Embretson, S. E. (1994). Applications of cognitive design systems to test development. In C. Reynolds (Ed.), Advances in cognitive assessment: An interdisciplinary perspective(pp. 107-135). New York: Plenum.
15. Embretson, S. (1995a). A measurement model for linking individual change to processes and knowledge: Application to mathematical learning. Journal of Educational Measurement, vol. 32(3) 275-294.
16. Embretson, S. E. (1995b). Working memory capacity versus general central processes in intelligence. Intelligence, 20,169-189.
17. Embretson, S. E. (1997a). Multicomponent latent trait models. In W. van der Linden & R. Hambleton (Eds.), Handbook of modern item response theory(pp. 305-322). New York: Springer-Verlag.
18. Embretson, S. E. (1998). A cognitive design system approach to generating valid tests: Application to abstract reasoning. Psychological Methods, 3, 300-396.
19. Embretson, S. E. (1999). Generating items during testing: Psychometric issues and models. Psychometrika, 64,407-433.
20. Embretson, S. E. (2000). Generating assembling objects items from cognitive specifications. HUMRRO Report No. SubPR98-11. Alexandria, VA: Human Resource Research Organisation.
21. Embretson, S. E. (2002a). Cognitive models for psychometric properties of GRE quantitative items. Report 02-03 to Assessment Design Center. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
22. Embretson, S. E. (2002b). Generating abstract reasoning items with cognitive theory. In S. Irvine & P. Kyllonen (Eds.), Item generation for test development(pp. 219-250). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
23. Embretson, S. E., & Gorin, J. (2001). Improving construct validity with cognitive psychology principles. Journal ofEducational Measurement, vol. 38(4), pp. 343-368.
24. Embretson, S. E., & Reise, S. (2000). Item response theory for psychologists. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
25. Embretson, S. E., & Schneider, L. M. (1989). Cognitive component models for psychometric analogies: Conceptual driven versus interactive models. Learning and Individual Differences, vol. 1(2), 155-178.
26. Embretson, S. E., & Wetzel, D. (1987). Component latent trait models for paragraph comprehension tests. Applied Psychological Measurement, 11,175-193.
27. Embretson, S. E., & Yang, X. (2002). Modeling item parameters from cognitive design features using non-linear mixed models. Symposium paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA, April, 2002.
28. Embretson, S. E., Schneider, L. M., & Roth, D. L. (1985). Multiple processing strategies and the construct validity of verbal reasoning tests. Journal of Educational Measurement, 23,13-32.
29. Fischer, G. H. (1973). Linear logistic test model as an instrument in educational research. Acta Psychologica, 37, 359-374.
30. Gorin, J. (2002). Cognitive design principles for paragraph comprehension items. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Kansas.
31. Gustafsson, J. E. (1988). Hierarchical models of individual differences in cooperative abilities. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Advances in the psychology of human intelligence(Vol. 4, pp. 35-71). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
32. Hambleton, R. K., & Swaminathan, H. (1985). Item response theory: Principles and applications. Norwell, MA: Kluwer.
33. Mislevy, R. J., Sheehan, K. M., & Wingersky, M. (1993). How to equate tests with little or no data. Journal of Educational Measurement, 30, 55-76.
34. Psychological Data Corp. (2002). ITEMGEN1, Item generator for non-verbal intelligence test items. Lawrence, KS: Psychological Data Corporation.
35. Raven, J. C., Court, J. H., & Raven, J. (1992). Manual for Raven's Progressive Matrices and Vocabulary Scale. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.
36. Sternberg, R. J. (1977). Intelligence, information processing, and analogical reasoning: The componential analysis of human abilities. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
37. Whitely, S. E., & Schneider, L. M. (1981). Information structure on geometric analogies: A test theory approach. Applied Psychological Measurement, 5,383-397.