Journals / Eğitimde ve Psikolojide Ölçme ve Değerlendirme Dergisi / 2019 / Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 3

Investigation of Item Selection Methods According to Test Termination Rules in CAT Applications

Pages
315–326
Publication Date
2022-10-12
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

For the cases where the stopping rule was SE < .20 and SE < .40 and Maximum Likelihood Estimation method was used, the average number of items were found to be highest in all item selection methods.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this research, computerized adaptive testing item selection methods were investigated in regard to ability estimation methods and test termination rules.
📊
Key Findings & Data:For this purpose, an item pool including 250 items and 2000 people were simulated (M = 0, SD = 1).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:For the cases where the stopping rule was SE < .20 and SE < .40 and Maximum Likelihood Estimation method was used, the average number of items were found to be highest in all item selection methods.
🔬Design:Lab & Field Experiment
📍Scope:2000 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

In this research, computerized adaptive testing item selection methods were investigated in regard to ability estimation methods and test termination rules. For this purpose, an item pool including 250 items and 2000 people were simulated (M = 0, SD = 1). A total of thirty computerized adaptive testing (CAT) conditions were created according to item selection methods (Maximum Fisher Information, a-stratification, Likelihood Weight Information Criterion, Gradual Information Ratio, and Kullback-Leibler), ability estimation methods (Maximum Likelihood Estimation, Expected a Posteriori Distribution), and test termination rules (40 items, SE < .20 and SE < .40). According to the fixed test-length stopping rule, the SE values that were obtained by using the Maximum Likelihood Estimation method were found to be higher than the SE values that were obtained by using the Expected a Posteriori Distribution ability estimation method. When ability estimation was Maximum Likelihood, the highest SE value was obtained from a-stratification item selection method when the test length is smaller then 30. Whereas, Kullback-Leibler item selection method yielded the highest SE value when the test length is larger then 30. According to Expected a Posteriori ability estimation method, the highest SE value was obtained from a-stratification item selection method in all test lengths. In the conditions where test termination rule was SE < .20, and Maximum Likelihood Ability Estimation method was used, the lowest and highest average number of items were obtained from the Gradual Information Ratio and Maximum Fisher Information item selection method, respectively. Furthermore, when the SE is lower than .20 and Expected a Posteriori ability estimation method was utilized, the lowest average number of items was obtained through Kullback-Leibler, and the highest was obtained through Likelihood Weight Information Criterion item selection method. In the conditions where the test termination rule was SE < .40, and ability estimation method was Maximum Likelihood Estimation, the maximum and minimum number of items were obtained by using Maximum Fisher Information and Kullback-Leibler item selection methods respectively. Additionally, when Expected a Posteriori ability estimation was used, the maximum and minimum number of items were obtained via Maximum Fisher Information and a-stratification item selection methods. For the cases where the stopping rule was SE < .20 and SE < .40 and Maximum Likelihood Estimation method was used, the average number of items were found to be highest in all item selection methods.

🔖

Cite This Article

KELECİOĞLU, H., SULAK, S. (2022). Investigation of Item Selection Methods According to Test Termination Rules in CAT Applications. Eğitimde ve Psikolojide Ölçme ve Değerlendirme Dergisi, Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 3, 315–326. https://ajindex.com/articles/497202

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (2)

  1. Bock, R. D., & Mislevy, R. J. (1982). Adaptive EAP estimation of ability in a microcomputer environment. Applied Psychological Measurement, 6(4), 431-444. doi: 10.1177/014662168200600405 Bulut, O., & Sünbül, Ö. (2017). R programlama dili ile madde tepki kuramında monte carlo simülasyon çalışmaları. Journal of Measurement and Evaluation in Education and Psychology, 8(3), 266-287. doi: 10.21031/epod.305821 Chang, H.-H, Qian, J., & Ying, Z. (2001). a-stratified multistage adaptive testing with b blocking. Applied Psychological Measurement, 25(4), 333-341. doi: 10.1177/01466210122032181 Chang, H.-H, & Ying, Z. (1996). A global information approach to computerized adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 20(3), 213-229. doi: 10.1177/014662169602000303 Chang, H. H, & Ying, Z. (1999). a-stratified multistage computerized adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 23(3), 211-222. doi: 10.1177/01466219922031338 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(3), 241-255. doi: 10.1177/01466210022031705 Costa, D., Karino, C., Moura, F., & Andrade, D. (2009, June). A comparision of three methods of item selection for computerized adaptive testing. Paper session presented at the meeting of 2009 GMAC Conference on Computerized Adaptive Testing. Retrieved from www.psych.umn.edu/psylabs/CATCentral/ Deng, H., & Chang, H. H. (2001, April). A-stratified computerized adaptive testing with unequal item exposure across strata. Paper session presented at the American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting 2001. Retrieved from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/93050/
  2. Deng, H., Ansley, T., & Chang, H. H. (2010). Stratified and maximum information item selection procedures in computer adaptive testing. Journal of Educational Measurement, 47(2), 202-226. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-3984.2010.00109.x Eggen, T. H. J. M. (1999). Item selection in adaptive testing with the sequential probability ratio test. Applied Psychological Measurement, 23(3), 249-261. doi: 10.1177/01466219922031365 Feinberg, R. A., & Rubright, J. D. (2016). Conducting simulation studies in psychometrics. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 35(2), 36-49. doi: 10.1111/emip.12111 Han, K. (2009). Gradual maximum information ratio approach to item selection in computerized adaptive testing (Graduate Management Admission Council Research Reports No. 09-07).