Using automatic item generation to meet the increasing item demands of high-stakes educational and occupational assessment

Learning and Individual Differences

Volumn 22, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 112-117

  Arendasy, Martin E ^a   Sommer, Markus ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GRAZ   (Austria)

Author keywords

Automatic item generation; Inductive reasoning; Measurement invariance

Indexed keywords

EID: 84855426582     PISSN: 10416080     EISSN: 18733425     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.lindif.2011.11.005     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Andersen E.B. A goodness of fit test for the Rasch model. Psychometrica 1973, 8:123-140.
2. Arendasy M., Hergovich A., Sommer M. Investigating the 'g' saturation of various stratum-two factors using automatic item generation. Intelligence 2008, 36:574-583.
3. Arendasy M., Hornke L.F., Sommer M., Häusler J., Wagner-Menghin M., Gittler G., Bognar B., Wenzl M. Manual intelligence structure battery (INSBAT) Mödling: SCHUHFRIED GmbH 2009.
4. Arendasy M., Sommer M. The effect of different types of perceptual manipulations on the dimensionality of automatically generated figural matrices. Intelligence 2005, 33:307-324.
5. Arendasy M., Sommer M. Automatic generation of quantitative reasoning items: A schema-based isomorphic approach. Learning and Individual Differences 2007, 17:366-383.
6. Arendasy M., Sommer M. Evaluating the contribution of different item features to the effect size of the gender difference in three-dimensional mental rotation using automatic item generation. Intelligence 2010, 38:574-581.
7. Arendasy M., Sommer M. Automatisierte Itemgenerierung: Aktuelle Ansätze, Anwendungen und Forschungen. Enzyklopädie für Psychologie: Methoden der Psychologischen Diagnostik (S) 2011, 215-280. Hogrefe, Göttingen. L.F. Hornke, M. Amelang, M. Kersting (Eds.).
8. Arendasy M., Sommer M., Mayr F. Using automatic item generation to simultaneously construct German and English versions of a word fluency test 2011, Cross Cultural Psychology.
9. Beauducel A., Wittmann W.W. Simulation study on fit indexes in CFA based on data with slightly distorted simple structure. Structural Equation Modeling 2005, 12:41-75.
10. Bejar I.I. Generative testing: From conception to implementation. Item generation for test development 2002, 199-218. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New Jersey. S.H. Irvine, P.C. Kyllonen (Eds.).
11. Carroll J.B. The higher-stratum structure of cognitive abilities: Current evidence supports g and about ten broad factors. The scientific study of general intelligence: Tribute to Arthur R. Jensen 2003, 5-22. Pergamon, San Diego. H. Nyborg (Ed.).
12. Chamorro-Premuzic T., Arteche A. Intellectual competence and academic performance: Preliminary validation of a model. Intelligence 2008, 36:64-573.
13. Cheung G.W., Rensvold R.B. Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling 2002, 9:233-255.
14. Embretson S.E. Construct validity: Construct representation versus nomothetic span. Psychological Bulletin 1983, 93:179-197.
15. Embretson S.E. Measuring human intelligence with artificial intelligence. Cognition and intelligence 2005, 251-267. Cambridge University Press, New York. R.J. Sternberg, J.E. Pretz (Eds.).
16. Embretson S.E., Yang X. Automatic item generation and cognitive psychology. Psychometrics 2007, Vol. 26:747-768. Elsevier, North Holland. C.R. Rao, S. Sinharay (Eds.).
17. Fischer G.H. The linear logistic test model. Rasch models. Foundations, recent developments, and applications 1995, 157-180. Springer, New York. G.H. Fischer, I.W. Molenaar (Eds.).
18. Glas C.A., van der Linden W.J. Computerized adaptive testing with item cloning. Applied Psychological Measurement 2003, 27:247-261.
19. Gorin J.S. Test design with cognition in mind. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice 2006, 25:21-35.
20. Gottfredson L.S. Why g matters: The complexity of everyday life. Intelligence 1997, 24:79-132.
21. Greeno J.G., Moore J.L., Smith D.R. Transfer of situated learning. Transfer on trial: Intelligence, cognition, and instruction 1993, 99-167. Ablex Publishing, Wetsport, CT, US. D.K. Dettermann, R.J. Sternberg (Eds.).
22. Guo J., Tay L., Drasgow F. Conspiracies and test compromise: An evaluation of the resistance of test systems to small-scale cheating. International Journal of Testing 2009, 9:283-309.
23. Gustafsson J.E. Measurement from a hierarchical point of view. The role of constructs in psychological and educational measurement 2002, 73-95. Erlbaum, Mahwah. J.I. Braun, D.N. Jackson, D.E. Wiley (Eds.).
24. Holzman T.G., Pellegrino J.W., Glaser G. Cognitive variables in series completion. Journal of Educational Psychology 1983, 75:603-618.
25. Horn J.L., Noll J. Human cognitive capabilities: Gf-Gc theory. Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests and issues 1997, 53-91. Guilford, New York. D.P. Flanagan, J.L. Genshaft, P.L. Harrison (Eds.).
26. Hornke L.F., Habon M.W. Rule-based item bank construction and evaluation within the linear logistic framework. Applied Psychological Measurement 1986, 10:369-380.
27. Hu L.T., Bentler P.M. Cutoff criteria for fit indices in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal 1999, 6:1-55.
28. Irvine S.H. The foundations of item generation for mass testing. Item generation for test development 2002, 3-34. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ. S.H. Irvine, P.C. Kyllonnen (Eds.).
29. Kotovsky K., Simon H.A. Empirical tests of a theory of human acquisition of concepts for sequential patterns. Cognitive Psychology 1973, 4:399-424.
30. Krause B. Zum Erkennen rekursiver Regularitäten [On recognizing recursive regularities]. Zeitschrift für Psychologie 1985, 193:71-86.
31. LeFevre J., Bisanz J. A cognitive analysis of number-series problems: Sources of individual differences in performance. Memory & Cognition 1986, 14:287-298.
32. Marsh H.W., Hau K.T., Wen Z. In search of golden rules: Comment on hypothesis testing approaches to setting cutoff values for fit indexes and dangers in overgeneralising Hu & Bentler's (1999) findings. Structural Equation Modelling 2004, 11:320-341.
33. Morley M.E., Bridgeman B., Lawless R.R. Transfer between variants of quantitative items (GRE Board Rep. No. 00-06R) 2004, ETS, Princeton.
34. Penfield R.D., Camilli G. Differential item functioning and item bias. Psychometrics 2007, Vol. 26:125-167. Elsevier, North Holland. C.R. Rao, S. Sinharay (Eds.).
35. Primi R., Errao M.E., Almeida L.S. Fluid intelligence as a predictor of learning: A longitudinal multilevel approach applied to math. Learning and Individual Differences 2010, 20:446-451.
36. Ptucha J. Kognitive Operationen beim Fortsetzen von Zahlenfolgen: Eine experimentelle Untersuchung zur Theorie der Wissensraume. Zeitschrift für Psychologie 1994, 202:253-274.
37. Rasch G. Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests 1980, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
38. Scharroo J., Leeuwenberg E. Representation versus process in simplicity of serial pattern completion. Cognitive Psychology 2000, 40:39-86.
39. Spearman Ch The nature of 'intelligence' and the principles of cognition 1923, Macmillan, London.
40. Vergust T., Maris E., DeBoeck P. A dynamic model for rule induction tasks. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 2002, 46:455-485.
41. Wainer H. On the automatic generation of test items: Some whens, whys and hows. Item generation for test development 2002, 287-316. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New Jersey. S.H. Irvine, P.C. Kyllonen (Eds.).
42. Wu A.D., Li Z., Zumbo B.D. Decoding the meaning of factorial invariance and updating the practice of multi.group confirmatory factor analysis: A demonstration with TIMSS data. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation 2007, 12:1-26.