@article {199,
	title = {Computerized adaptive testing for polytomous motivation items: Administration mode effects and a comparison with short forms},
	journal = {Applied Psychological Measurement},
	volume = {31},
	number = {5},
	year = {2007},
	note = {10.1177/0146621606297314Journal; Peer Reviewed Journal; Journal Article},
	pages = {412-429},
	abstract = {In a randomized experiment (n=515), a computerized and a computerized adaptive test (CAT) are compared. The item pool consists of 24 polytomous motivation items. Although items are carefully selected, calibration data show that Samejima{\textquoteright}s graded response model did not fit the data optimally. A simulation study is done to assess possible consequences of model misfit. CAT efficiency was studied by a systematic comparison of the CAT with two types of conventional fixed length short forms, which are created to be good CAT competitors. Results showed no essential administration mode effects. Efficiency analyses show that CAT outperformed the short forms in almost all aspects when results are aggregated along the latent trait scale. The real and the simulated data results are very similar, which indicate that the real data results are not affected by model misfit. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2007 APA ) (journal abstract)},
	keywords = {2220 Tests \& Testing, Adaptive Testing, Attitude Measurement, computer adaptive testing, Computer Assisted Testing, items, Motivation, polytomous motivation, Statistical Validity, Test Administration, Test Forms, Test Items},
	isbn = {0146-6216},
	author = {Hol, A. M. and Vorst, H. C. M. and Mellenbergh, G. J.}
}
