Applied Psychological Measurement

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
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
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kim, S.-H.
Right arrow Articles by Cohen, A. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Applied Psychological Measurement, Vol. 19, No. 2, 167-176 (1995)
DOI: 10.1177/014662169501900204

A Minimum {chi}2 Method for Equating Tests Under the Graded Response Model

Seock-Ho Kim

University of Wisconsin, Madison

Allan S. Cohen

University of Wisconsin, Madison

The minimum x2 method for computing equating coefficients for tests with dichotomously scored items was extended to the case of Samejima's graded response items. The minimum X2 method was compared with the test response function method (also referred to as the test characteristic curve method) in which the equating coefficients were obtained by matching the test response functions of the two tests. The minimum X2 method was much less demanding computationally and yielded equating coefficients that differed little from those obtained using the test response function approach. Index terms: equating, graded response model, item response theory, minimum xz method, test response function method.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Applied Psychological MeasurementHome page
J. Anderson Koenig and J. S. Roberts
Linking Parameters Estimated With the Generalized Graded Unfolding Model: A Comparison of the Accuracy of Characteristic Curve Methods
Applied Psychological Measurement, November 1, 2007; 31(6): 504 - 524.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Applied Psychological MeasurementHome page
S.-H. Kim and A. S. Cohen
A Comparison of Linking and Concurrent Calibration Under the Graded Response Model
Applied Psychological Measurement, March 1, 2002; 26(1): 25 - 41.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Applied Psychological MeasurementHome page
G. S. Kaskowitz and R. J. De Ayala
The Effect of Error in Item Parameter Estimates on the Test Response Function Method of Linking
Applied Psychological Measurement, March 1, 2001; 25(1): 39 - 52.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Applied Psychological MeasurementHome page
A. S. Cohen and S.-H. Kim
An Investigation of Linking Methods Under the Graded Response Model
Applied Psychological Measurement, June 1, 1998; 22(2): 116 - 130.
[Abstract] [PDF]