Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to submit your manuscript to SPPS

Click here for more information on Research and Evaluation in Education and Psychology, 3e

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Applied Psychological Measurement
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Skaggs, G.
Right arrow Articles by Lissitz, R. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

An Exploration of the Robustness of Four Test Equating Models

Gary Skaggs

University of Maryland

Robert W. Lissitz

University of Maryland

This monte carlo study explored how four com monly used test equating methods (linear, equipercen tile, and item response theory methods based on the Rasch and three-parameter models) responded to tests of different psychometric properties. The four methods were applied to generated data sets where mean item difficulty and discrimination as well as level of chance scoring were manipulated. In all cases, examinee abil ity was matched to the level of difficulty of the tests. The results showed the Rasch model not to be very robust to violations of the equal discrimination and non-chance scoring assumptions. There were also problems with the three-parameter model, but these were due primarily to estimation and linking prob lems. The recommended procedure for tests similar to those studied is the equipercentile method.

Applied Psychological Measurement, Vol. 10, No. 3, 303-317 (1986)
DOI: 10.1177/014662168601000308
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Applied Psychological MeasurementHome page
G. Skaggs and R. W. Lissitz
Effect of Examinee Ability on Test Equating Invariance
Applied Psychological Measurement, March 1, 1988; 12(1): 69 - 82.
[Abstract]

Home page
 Applied Psychological MeasurementHome page
D. J. Harris and H.D. Hooker
An Application of the Three-Parameter IRT Model to Vertical Equating
Applied Psychological Measurement, June 1, 1987; 11(2): 151 - 159.
[Abstract] [PDF]