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 HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Hanson, B. A. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

A Comparison of Bivariate Smoothing Methods in Common-Item Equipercentile Equating

American College Testing

The effectiveness of smoothing the bivariate distributions of common and noncommon item scores in the frequency estimation method of common-item equipercentile equating was exam ined. The mean squared error of equating was computed for several equating methods and sample sizes, for two sets of population bivariate distribu tions of equating and nonequating item scores defined using data from a professional licensure exam. Eight equating methods were compared: five equipercentile methods and three linear methods. One of the equipercentile methods was unsmoothed equipercentile equating. Four methods of smoothed equipercentile (SEP) equating were con sidered : two based on log-linear models, one based on the four-parameter beta binomial model, and one based on the four-parameter beta compound binomial model. The three linear equating methods were the Tucker method, the Levine Equally Reliable method, and the Levine Unequally Reliable method. The results indicated that smoothed distributions produced more accurate equating functions than the unsmoothed distributions, even for the largest sample size. Tucker linear equating produced more accurate results than SEP equating when the systematic error introduced by assuming a linear equating function was small relative to the random error of the methods of SEP equating.

Key Words: Index terms: common-item equating, equating • log-linear models • smoothing • strong true score models.

Applied Psychological Measurement, Vol. 15, No. 4, 391-408 (1991)
DOI: 10.1177/014662169101500410


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

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. Liou and P. E. Cheng Asymptotic Standard Error of Equipercentile Equating Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, January 1, 1995; 20(3): 259 - 286. [Abstract] [PDF]

				L. Zeng and R. T. Cope Standard Error of Linear Equating for the Counterbalanced Design Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, January 1, 1995; 20(4): 337 - 348. [Abstract] [PDF]