Comparison of methods for controlling maximum exposure rates in computerized adaptive testing;Comparación de métodos para el control de tasa máxima en tests adaptativos informatizados

Psicothema

Volumn 21, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 313-320

  Barrada, Juan Ramón ^a   Abad, Francisco José ^b   Veldkamp, Bernard P ^c  

^a UNIVERSITAT AUTÒNOMA DE BARCELONA   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSIDAD AUTÓNOMA DE MADRID   (Spain)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TWENTE   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; MATHEMATICAL COMPUTING; PSYCHOLOGIC TEST; STANDARD; STATISTICS;

NUMERICAL ANALYSIS, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTS;

EID: 67549109706     PISSN: 02149915     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Barrada, J.R., Olea, J., & Abad, F.J. (2008). Rotating item banks versus restriction of maximum exposure rates in computerized adaptive testing. Spanish Journal of Psychology, 11, 618-625.
2. Barrada, J.R., Olea, J., & Ponsoda, V. (2007). Methods for restricting maximum exposure rate in computerized adaptative testing. Methodology, 3, 14-23.
3. Barrada, J.R., Olea, J., Ponsoda, V., & Abad, F.J. (2009). Item selection rules in Computerized Adaptive Testing: Accuracy and security. Methodology, 5, 7-17.
4. Birnbaum, A. (1968). Some latent ability models and their use in inferring an examinee's ability. In F.M. Lord & M.R. Novick (Eds.): Statistical theories of mental test scores (pp. 392-479). Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.
5. Bock, R.D., & Mislevy, R.J. (1982). Adaptive EAP estimation of ability in a microcomputer environment. Applied Psychological Measurement, 6, 431-444.
6. Chang, H.H., & Ying, Z. (1996). A global information approach to computerized adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 20, 213-229.
7. Chang, S.W., & Harris, D.J. (2002, April). Redeveloping the exposure control parameters of CAT items when a pool is modified. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans LA.
8. Chen, S.Y., Ankenmann, R.D., & Chang, H.H. (2000). A comparison of item selection rules at the early stages of computerized adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 24, 241-255.
9. Chen, S.Y., Ankenmann, R.D., & Spray, J.A. (2003). The relationship between item exposure and test overlap in computerized adaptive testing. Journal of Educational Measurement, 40, 129-145.
10. Chen, S.Y., & Doong, S.H. (2008). Predicting item exposure parameters in computerized adaptive testing. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 61, 75-91.
11. Chen, S.Y., Lei, P.W., & Liao. W.H. (2008). Controlling item exposure and test overlap on the fly in computerized adaptive testing. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 61, 471-492.
12. Dodd, B.G. (1990). The effect of item selection procedure and stepsize on computerized adaptive attitude measurement using the rating scale model. Applied Psychological Measurement, 14, 355-366.
13. 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.
14. Revuelta, J., & Ponsoda, V. (1998). A comparison of item exposure control methods in computerized adaptive testing. Journal of Educational Measurement, 35, 311-327.
15. Stocking, M.L., & Lewis, C.L. (1998). Controlling item exposure conditional on ability in computerized adaptive testing. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 23, 57-75.
16. Stocking, M.L., & Lewis, C.L. (2000). Methods of controlling the exposure of items in CAT. In W.J. van der Linden & C.A.W. Glas (Eds.): Computerized adaptive testing: Theory and practice (pp. 163-182). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
17. Sympson, J.B., & Hetter, R.D. (1985, October). Controlling item-exposure rates in computerized adaptive testing. In Proceedings of the 27th annual meeting of the Military Testing Association (pp. 973-977). San Diego, CA: Navy Personnel Research and Development Center.
18. van der Linden, W.J. (2003). Some alternatives to Sympson-Hetter item-exposure control in computerized adaptive testing. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 28, 249-265.
19. van der Linden, W.J. (2005). A comparison of item-selection method for adaptive tests with content constraints. Journal of Educational Measurement, 45, 283-302.
20. van der Linden, W.J., & Pashley, P.J. (2000). Item selection and ability estimation in adaptive testing. In W.J. van der Linden & C.A.W. Glas (Eds.): Computerized adaptive testing: Theory and practice (pp. 1-25). Norwell, MA: Kluwer.
21. van der Linden, W.J., & Reese, L.M. (1998). A model for optimal constrained adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 22, 259-270.
22. van der Linden, W.J., & Veldkamp, B.P. (2004). Constraining item exposure in computerized adaptive testing with shadow tests. Journal of Educational & Behavioral Statistics, 29, 273-291.
23. van der Linden, W.J., & Veldkamp, B.P. (2007). Conditional item-exposure control in adaptive testing using item-ineligibility probabilities. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics 32, 398-418.
24. Way, W.D. (1998). Protecting the integrity of computerized testing item pools. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 17, 17-27.