Computerized adaptive testing with the zinnes and griggs pairwise preference ideal point model

International Journal of Testing

Volumn 11, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 231-247

  Stark, Stephen ^a   Chernyshenko, Oleksandr S ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA   (United States)

^b NANYANG TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY   (Singapore)

Author keywords

Cat; Ideal point; Irt; Paired comparison; Performance assessment

Indexed keywords

EID: 79960778973     PISSN: 15305058     EISSN: 15327574     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/15305058.2011.561459     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Birnbaum, A. (1968). Some latent trait 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. 397-472). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
2. Bock, R. D., & Mislevy, R. J. (1982). Adaptive EAP estimation of ability in a microcomputer, environment. Applied Psychological Measurement, 6, 431-444.
3. Böckenholt, U. (2004). Comparative judgments as an alternative to ratings: Identifying the scale origin. Psychological Methods, 9, 453-465.
4. Borman, W. C., Buck, D., Hanson, M. A., Motowidlo, S. J, Stark, S., & Drasgow, F. (2001). An examination of the comparative reliability, validity, and accuracy of performance ratings made using computerized adaptive rating scales. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 965-973.
5. Borman, W. C., Hanson, M. A., Motowidlo, S. J., Drasgow, F., Foster, L., & Kubisiak, U. C. (1998, April). Computerized adaptive rating scales that measure contextual performance. Paper presented at the 13th annual conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Dallas, TX.
6. Chernyshenko, O. S., Stark, S. E., Drasgow, F., & Roberts, B. W. (2007). Constructing personality scales under the assumptions of an ideal point response process: Toward increasing the flexibility of personality measures. Psychological Assessment, 19, 88-106.
7. Hol, A. M., Vorst, H. C. M., & Mellenbergh, G. J. (2005). A randomized experiment to compare conventional, computerized, and computerized adaptive administration of ordinal polytomous attitude items. Applied Psychological Measurement, 29, 159-183.
8. Houston, J. S., Borman, W. C., Farmer, W. L., & Bearden, R. M. (2005). Development of the Enlisted Computer Adaptive Personality Scales (ENCAPS) for the United States Navy, Phase 2 (Institute Report No. 503). Minneapolis, MN: Personnel Decisions Research Institute.
9. Kantrowitz, T. M., & Tuzinski, K. A. (2010). The ideal point model in action: How the use of computer adaptive personality scales benefits organizations. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 3, 507-510.
10. Roberts, J. S., Lin, Y., & Laughlin, J. E. (2001). Computerized adaptive testing with the Generalized Graded Unfolding Model. Applied Psychological Measurement, 25, 177-196.
11. Schneider, R. J., Goff, M., Anderson, S., & Borman, W. C. (2003). Computerized adaptive rating scales for measuring managerial performance. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 11, 237-246.
12. Simms, L. J., & Clark, L. J. (2005). Validation of a computerized adaptive version of the Schedule of Nonadaptive and Adaptive Personality (SNAP). Psychological Assessment, 17, 28-43.
13. Stark, S., & Drasgow, F. (1998, April). Application of an item response theory ideal point model to computer adaptive assessment of job performance. Paper presented at the 13th annual conference for the Society of Industrial and Organizational Psychologists, Dallas, TX.
14. Stark, S., & Drasgow, F. (2002). An EM approach to parameter estimation for the Zinnes and Griggs paired comparison IRT model. Applied Psychological Measurement, 26, 208-227.
15. Waller, N. G., & Reise, S. P. (1989). Computerized adaptive personality assessment: An illustration with the Absorption scale. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 1051-1058.
16. Zinnes, J. L., & Griggs, R. A. (1974). Probabilistic, multidimensional unfolding analysis. Psychome-trika, 39, 327-350.