This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by MacCann, R. G. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

A Comparison of Two Observed-Score Equating Methods That Assume Equally Reliable, Congeneric Tests

New South Wales Department of Education

For the external-anchor test equating model, two observed-score methods are derived using the slope and intercept assumptions of univariate selection the ory and the assumptions that the tests to be equated are congeneric and equally reliable. The first deriva tion, Method 1, is then shown to give the same set of equations as Levine's equations for random groups and unequally reliable tests and the "Z predicting X and Y" method. The second derivation, Method 2, is shown to give the same equations as Potthoff's (1966) Method B and the "X and Y predicting Z" method. Methods 1 and 2 are compared empirically with Tuck er's and Levine's equations for equally reliable tests; the conditions for which they may be appropriately applied are discussed.

Key Words: Index terms: Angoff's Design V equations • congeneric tests • equally reliable tests, Levine's equations (equally reliable) • linear equating, observed-score equating • test equating • Tucker's equa tions.

Applied Psychological Measurement, Vol. 13, No. 3, 263-276 (1989)
DOI: 10.1177/014662168901300306


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?