Computerized adaptive testing: The capitalization on chance problem

Spanish Journal of Psychology

Volumn 15, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 424-441

  Olea, Julio ^a   Barrada, Juan Ramón ^b   Abad, Francisco J ^a   Ponsoda, Vicente ^a   Cuevas, Lara ^c  

^a UNIVERSIDAD AUTÓNOMA DE MADRID   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ZARAGOZA   (Spain)

^c UNIVERSIDAD COMPLUTENSE DE MADRID   (Spain)

Author keywords

Capitalization on chance; Computerized adaptive testing; Item parameter estimation

Indexed keywords

EID: 84857019538     PISSN: 11387416     EISSN: 19882904     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5209/rev_SJOP.2012.v15.n1.37348     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Abad, F. J., Olea, J., Aguado, D., Ponsoda, V., & Barrada, J. R. (2010). Deterioro de parametros de los items en tests adaptativos informatizados: Estudio con eCAT. [Item parameter drift in computerized adaptive testing: Study with eCAT]. Psicothema, 22, 340-347.
2. Baker, F. B. (1992). Item Response Theory. Parameter estimation techniques. New York, NY: Marcel Dekker.
3. Barrada, J. R. (In press). Tests adaptativos informatizados: Una perspectiva general [Computerized Adaptive Testing: An overview]. Anales de Psicología.
4. Barrada, J. R., Abad, F. J., & Olea, J. (2011). Varying the valuating function and the presentable bank in computerized adaptive testing. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 14, 500-508. http://dx.doi.org/10.5209/rev_SJOP.2011.v14.n1.45
5. Barrada, J. R., Olea, J., Ponsoda, V., & Abad, F. J. (2008). Incorporating randomness in the Fisher information for improving item-exposure control in CATs. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 61, 493-513. http://dx.doi.org/10.1348/000711007X230937
6. Birnbaum, A. (1968). Some latent trait models and their use in inferring an examinee/s ability. In F. M. Lord & M. R. Novick, (1968). Statistical theories of mental test scores (pp. 397-479). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
7. 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. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/014662169001400403
8. Gao, F., & Chen, L. (2005). Bayesian or non-Bayesian: A comparison study of item parameter estimation in the threeparameter logistic model. Applied Measurement in Education, 18, 351-380. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15324818ame1804_2
9. Georgiadou, E., Triantafillou, E., & Economides, A. (2007). A review of item exposure control strategies for computerized adaptive testing developed from 1983 to 2005. Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 5. Retrieved from http://escholarship.bc.edu/ojs/index.php/jtla/article/viewFile/164 7/1482
10. Glas, C. A. W. (2005). The impact of item parameter estimation on CAT with item cloning. (Computerized Testing Report 02-06). Newtown, PA: Law School Admission Council.
11. Haley, S. M., Ni, P., Hambleton, R. K., Slavin, M. D., & Jette, A. M. (2006). Computer adaptive testing improved accuracy and precision of scores over random item selection in a physical functioning item bank. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 59, 1174-1182. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. jclinepi.2006.02.010
12. Hambleton, R. K., & Jones, R. W. (1994). Item parameter estimation errors and their influence on test information functions. Applied Measurement in Education, 7, 171-186. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15324818ame0703_1
13. Hambleton, R. K., Jones, R. W., & Rogers, H. J. (1993). Influence of item parameter estimation errors in test development. Journal of Educational Measurement, 30, 143-155. http://dx.doi.org/10. 1111/j.1745-3984.1993.tb01071.x
14. Hambleton, R. K., Zaal, J. N., & Pieters, J. P. M. (1991). Computerized adaptive testing: Theory, applications, and standards. In R. K. Hambleton & J. N. Zaal (Eds.), Advances in educational and psychological testing. (pp. 341-366). Boston, MA: Kluwer.
15. Hulin, C. L., Drasgow, F., & Parsons, C. K. (1983). Item response theory: Application to psychological measurement. Homewood, IL: Dow Jones-Irwin.
16. Hulin, C. L., Lissak, R. I., & Drasgow, F. (1982). Recovery of two and three parameter logistic item characteristic curves: A Monte Carlo study. Applied Psychological Measurement, 6, 249-260. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/014662168200600301
17. Leung, C. K., Chang, H. H., & Hau, K. T. (2005). Computerized adaptive testing: A mixture item selection approach for constrained situations. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 58, 239-257. http://dx.doi.org/10.1348/000711005X62945
18. Li, Y. H., & Lissitz, R. W. (2004). Applications of the analytically derived asymptotic standard errors of item response theory item parameter estimates. Journal of Educational Measurement, 41, 85-117. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3984.2004.tb01109.x
19. Li, Y. H., & Schafer, W. D. (2003 April). The effect of item selection methods on the variability of CAT's ability estimates when item parameters are contaminated with measurement errors. Paper presented at the National Council on Measurement in Education Convention, Chicago, IL.
20. Li, Y. H., & Schafer, W. D. (2005). Increasing the homogeneity of CAT's item-exposure rates by minimizing or maximizing varied target functions while assembling shadow tests. Journal of Educational Measurement, 42, 245-269. http://dx.doi.org/10. 1111/j.1745-3984.2005.00013.x
21. Lord, F. M. (1977). A broad-range test of verbal ability. Applied Psychological Measurement, 1, 95-100. http://dx.doi.org/10. 1177/014662167700100115
22. Lord, F. M. (1980). Applications of Item Response Theory to practical testing problems. Hillsdale, NJ: LEA.
23. Luecht, R. M., De Champlain, A., & Nungester, R. J. (1998). Maintaining content validity in computerized adaptive testing. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 3, 29-41. http://dx.doi. org/10.1023/A:1009789314011
24. Mislevy, R. J. (1986). Bayes modal estimation in item response models. Psychometrika, 51, 177-196. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02293979
25. Mislevy, R. J., & Bock, R. D. (1990). PC-BILOG 3: Item analysis and test scoring with binary logistic models (Computer Program). Mooresville, IN: Scientific Software.
26. Mislevy, R. J., Wingersky, M. S., & Seehan, K. M. (1994). Dealing with uncertainty about item parameters: Expected response functions. Research Report 94-28-ONR. Princeton, NJ: Education Testing Service.
27. Nicewander, W. A., & Tomasson, G. L. (1999). Some reliability estimates for computerized adaptive tests. Applied Psychological Measurement, 29, 239-247. http://dx.doi.org/10. 1177/01466219922031356
28. Olea, J., Abad, F. J., Ponsoda, V. & Ximenez, M. C. (2004). Un test adaptativo informatizado para evaluar el conocimiento de ingles escrito: Diseno y comprobaciones psicometricas [A CAT for the assessment of written English: Design and psychometric properties]. Psicothema, 16, 519-525.
29. 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. http://dx.doi. org/10.2307/2285821
30. Ponsoda, V., & Olea, J. (2003). Adaptive and Tailored testing (including IRT and non-IRT application). In R. Fernandez-Ballesteros (Ed.), Encyclopaedia of Psychological Assessment (pp. 9-13). London, England: SAGE.
31. Revuelta, J., & Ponsoda, V. (1998). A comparison of item exposure control methods in computerized adaptive testing. Journal of Educational Measurement, 35, 311-327. http://dx.doi.org/10. 1111/j.1745-3984.1998.tb00541.x
32. Sympson, J. B., & Hetter, R. D. (1985, October). Controlling itemexposure 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.
33. Swaminathan, H., Hambleton, R. K., Sireci, S. G., Xing, D., & Rizavi, S. M. (2003). Small sample estimation in dichotomous item response models: Effect of priors based on judgmental information on the accuracy of item parameter estimates. Applied Psychological Measurement, 27, 27-51. http://dx.doi. org/10.1177/0146621602239475
34. Tsutakawa, R. K., & Johnson, J. C. (1990). The effect of uncertainty on item parameter estimation on ability estimates. Psychometrika, 55, 371-390. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF022 95293
35. van der Linden, W. J., & Glas, C. A. W. (2000). Capitalization on item calibration error in adaptive testing. Applied Measurement in Education, 13, 35-53. http://dx.doi.org/10. 1207/s15324818ame1301_2
36. van der Linden, W. J., & Glas, C. A. W. (2001). Cross-validating item parameter estimation in computerize adaptive testing. In A. Boomsma, M. A. J. van Duijn, & T. A. M. Snijders (Eds.), Essays on Item Response Theory (pp. 205-219). New York, NY: Springer.
37. Warm, T. A. (1989). Weighted likelihood estimation of ability in Item Response Theory. Psychometrika, 54, 427-450. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02294627
38. Willse, J. T. (2002). Controlling computer adaptive testinǵs capitalization on chance errors in item parameter estimates. (Unpublised doctoral dissertation). James Madison University, Harrisonburg, VA.
39. Wise, S. L., & Kingsbury, G. G. (2000). Practical issues in developing and maintaining a computerized adaptive testing. Psicológica, 21, 135-156.
40. Zimowski, M. F., Muraki, E., Mislevy, R. J., & Bock, R. D. (2003). BILOG-MG: Multiple-group IRT analysis and test maintenance for binary items. Chicago, IL: Scientific Software International.