A comment on early student blunders on computer-based adaptive tests

Applied Psychological Measurement

Volumn 35, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 165-174

  Green, Bert F ^a  

^a JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

computerized adaptive testing; item response theory; test scoring

Indexed keywords

EID: 79952095994     PISSN: 01466216     EISSN: 15523497     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0146621610377080     Document Type: Article

References (8)

1. Anderson. E. B. (1977). Sufficient statistics and latent trait models. Psychometrika, 42, 69-81.
2. de Ayala, R.J. (2009). The theory and practice of item response theory. New York, NY: Guilford.
3. Embretson, S.E., & Reise, S.P. (2000). Item response theory for psychologists. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
4. Lord, F.M. (1980). Applications of item response theory to practical testing problems. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
5. Owen, R.J. (1975). A Bayesian sequential procedure for quantal response in the context of adaptive mental testing. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 70, 351-356.
6. Rulison, K.L., & Loken, E. (2009). I've fallen and I can't get up: Can high-ability students recover from early mistakes in CAT? Applied Psychological Measurement, 33, 83-101.
7. Samejima, F. (1973). A comment on Birnbaum's three parameter logistic model in the latent trait theory. Psychometrika, 38, 221.
8. van Krimpen-Stoop, E., & Meijer, R. (2000). Detecting person misfit in adaptive testing using statistical process control techniques. In W. van der Linden & G. A. W. Glas (Eds.), Computerized adaptive testing: Theory and practice (pp. 201-219). Norwell, MA: Kluwer.