Research Article

Effects of Content Balancing and Item Selection Method on Ability Estimation in Computerized Adaptive Tests

Volume: 17 Number: 69 May 20, 2017
TR EN

Effects of Content Balancing and Item Selection Method on Ability Estimation in Computerized Adaptive Tests

Abstract

Purpose: This study aims to reveal effects of content balancing and item selection method on ability estimation in computerized adaptive tests by comparing Fisher’s maximum information (FMI) and likelihood weighted information (LWI) methods. Research Methods: Four groups of examinees (250, 500, 750, 1000) and a bank of 500 items with 10 different content domains were generated through Monte Carlo simulations. Examinee ability was estimated by fixing all settings except for the item selection methods mentioned. True and estimated ability (θ) values were compared by dividing examinees into six subgroups. Moreover, the average number of items used was compared. Findings: The correlations decreased steadily as examinee θ levelincreased among all examinee groups when LWI was used. FMI had the same trend with the 250 and 500 examinees. Correlations for 750 examinees decreased as θ level increased as well, but they were somewhat steady with FMI. For 1000 examinees, FMI was not successful in estimating examinee θ accurately after θ subgroup 4. Moreover, when FMI was used, θ estimates had less error than LWI. The figures regarding the average items used indicated that LWI used fewer items in subgroups 1, 2, 3 and that FMI used less items in subgroups 4, 5, and 6. Implications for Research and Practice: The findings indicated that when content balancing is put into use, LWI is more suitable to estimate examinee θ for examinees between -3 and 0 and that FMI is more stable when examinee θ is above 0. An item selection algorithm combining these two item selection methods is recommended.

Keywords

References

  1. Barrada, J. R., Olea, J., Ponsoda, V., & Abad, F. J. (2009). Item selection rules in computerized adaptive testing: Accuracy and security. Methodology: European Journal of Research Methods for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, 5, 7-17. https://dx.doi.org/10.1027/1614-2241.5.1.7
  2. Barrada, J. R., Olea, J., Ponsoda, V., & Abad, F. J. (2010). A method for the comparison of item selection rules in computerized adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 34, 438-452. https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0146621610370152
  3. Chang, H.-H., & Ying, Z. (1996). A global information approach to computerized adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 20, 213– 229. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/014662169602000303
  4. Chen, S.-Y., Ankenmann, R. D., & Chang, H. H.(2000). A comparison of item selection rules at the early stages of computerized adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 24, 241-255. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/01466210022031705
  5. Cheng, E.P. & Liou, M. (2003). Computerized adaptive testing using the nearest-neighbors criterion. Applied Psychological Measurement, 27(3), 204-216. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0146621603027003002
  6. Choi, S. W.& Swartz, R. J. (2009). Comparison of CAT item selection criteria for polytomous items. Applied Psychological Measurement, 33, 419-440. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0146621608327801
  7. Embretson, S.E. & Reise, S.P. (2000). Item response theory for psychologists. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Gao, F., & Chen, L. (2005). Bayesian or non-Bayesian: A comparison study of item parameter estimation in the three parameter logistic model. Applied Measurement in Education, 18, 351–380. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15324818ame1804_2
  8. Hambleton, R. K., & Swaminathan H. (1985). Item response theory: Principals and applications. Norwell, MA: Kluwer Nijhof.

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

-

Journal Section

Research Article

Publication Date

May 20, 2017

Submission Date

May 20, 2017

Acceptance Date

-

Published in Issue

Year 2017 Volume: 17 Number: 69

APA
Sahın, A., & Durmus Ozbası, D. O. (2017). Effects of Content Balancing and Item Selection Method on Ability Estimation in Computerized Adaptive Tests. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 17(69), 21-36. https://izlik.org/JA24AK66NY
AMA
1.Sahın A, Durmus Ozbası DO. Effects of Content Balancing and Item Selection Method on Ability Estimation in Computerized Adaptive Tests. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research. 2017;17(69):21-36. https://izlik.org/JA24AK66NY
Chicago
Sahın, Alper, and Durmus Ozbasi Durmus Ozbası. 2017. “Effects of Content Balancing and Item Selection Method on Ability Estimation in Computerized Adaptive Tests”. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research 17 (69): 21-36. https://izlik.org/JA24AK66NY.
EndNote
Sahın A, Durmus Ozbası DO (May 1, 2017) Effects of Content Balancing and Item Selection Method on Ability Estimation in Computerized Adaptive Tests. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research 17 69 21–36.
IEEE
[1]A. Sahın and D. O. Durmus Ozbası, “Effects of Content Balancing and Item Selection Method on Ability Estimation in Computerized Adaptive Tests”, Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, vol. 17, no. 69, pp. 21–36, May 2017, [Online]. Available: https://izlik.org/JA24AK66NY
ISNAD
Sahın, Alper - Durmus Ozbası, Durmus Ozbasi. “Effects of Content Balancing and Item Selection Method on Ability Estimation in Computerized Adaptive Tests”. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research 17/69 (May 1, 2017): 21-36. https://izlik.org/JA24AK66NY.
JAMA
1.Sahın A, Durmus Ozbası DO. Effects of Content Balancing and Item Selection Method on Ability Estimation in Computerized Adaptive Tests. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research. 2017;17:21–36.
MLA
Sahın, Alper, and Durmus Ozbasi Durmus Ozbası. “Effects of Content Balancing and Item Selection Method on Ability Estimation in Computerized Adaptive Tests”. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, vol. 17, no. 69, May 2017, pp. 21-36, https://izlik.org/JA24AK66NY.
Vancouver
1.Alper Sahın, Durmus Ozbasi Durmus Ozbası. Effects of Content Balancing and Item Selection Method on Ability Estimation in Computerized Adaptive Tests. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research [Internet]. 2017 May 1;17(69):21-36. Available from: https://izlik.org/JA24AK66NY