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
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 Nicewander, W. A.
Right arrow Articles by Thomasson, G. L.
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?

Some Reliability Estimates for Computerized Adaptive Tests

W. Alan Nicewander

nicewndr{at}osd.pentagon.mil

Gary L. Thomasson

Defense Manpower Data Center West

Three reliability estimates are derived for the Bayes modal estimate (BME) and the maximum likelihood estimate (MLE) of {theta}in computerized adaptive tests (CAT). Each reliability estimate is a function of test information. Two of the estimates are shown to be upper bounds to true reliability. The three reliability estimates and the true reliabilities of both MLE and BME were computed for seven simulated CATs. Results showed that the true reliabilities for MLE and BME were nearly identical in all seven tests. The three reliability estimates never differed from the true reliabilities by more than .02 (.01 in most cases). A simple implementation of one reliability estimate was found to accurately estimate reliability in CATs.

Applied Psychological Measurement, Vol. 23, No. 3, 239-247 (1999)
DOI: 10.1177/01466219922031356
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
 Educational and Psychological MeasurementHome page
N. S. Raju and T. C. Oshima
Two Prophecy Formulas for Assessing the Reliability of Item Response Theory-Based Ability Estimates
Educational and Psychological Measurement, June 1, 2005; 65(3): 361 - 375.
[Abstract] [PDF]