Applied Psychological Measurement

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Register here to gain access to SAGE's 500+ Journals Online

Click here for more information on The Virtual Advisor

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 Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
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 ISI Web of Science (1)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Petersen, N. 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. 32, No. 1, 98-101 (2008)
DOI: 10.1177/0146621607311581

A Discussion of Population Invariance of Equating

Nancy S. Petersen

ACT, 500 ACT Drive, Iowa City, IA 52243-0168, nancy.petersen{at}act.org

This article discusses the five studies included in this issue. Each article addressed the same topic, population invariance of equating. They all used data from major standardized testing programs, and they all used essentially the same statistics to evaluate their results, namely, the root mean square difference and root expected mean square difference (Dorans & Holland, 2000). The major premises underlying all of these articles are that population invariance is a prerequisite for equating, and lack of population invariance can be taken as evidence that a linking is not an equating.

Key Words: Index terms: population sensitivity • linear equating • anchor test • RMSD • REMSD


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
A. A. von Davier and C. Wilson
Investigating the Population Sensitivity Assumption of Item Response Theory True-Score Equating Across Two Subgroups of Examinees and Two Test Formats
Applied Psychological Measurement, January 1, 2008; 32(1): 11 - 26.
[Abstract] [PDF]