Export 497 results:
Filters: First Letter Of Title is C [Clear All Filters]
. (2007). The comparison of maximum likelihood estimation and expected a posteriori in CAT using the graded response model. Journal of Elementary Education, 19, 339-371.
. (1997). A comparison of maximum likelihood estimation and expected a posteriori estimation in computerized adaptive testing using the generalized partial credit model. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: the Sciences & Engineering, 58, 453.
. (2005). A comparison of item-selection methods for adaptive tests with content constraints. Journal of Educational Measurement, 42, 283-302.
. (2005). A comparison of item-selection methods for adaptive tests with content constraints. Journal of Educational Measurement, 42, 283-302.
. (2010). A Comparison of Item Selection Techniques for Testlets. Applied Psychological Measurement, 34, 424-437. doi:10.1177/0146621609349804
. (2002). A comparison of item selection techniques and exposure control mechanisms in CATs using the generalized partial credit model. Applied Psychological Measurement, 26, 147-163.
. (2000). A comparison of item selection rules at the early stages of computerized adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 24, 241-255.
. (2000). A comparison of item selection rules at the early stages of computerized adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 24, 241-255.
. (1995). A comparison of item selection routines in linear and adaptive tests. Journal of Educational Measurement, 32, 227-242.
. (1998). A comparison of item exposure control methods in computerized adaptive testing. Journal of Educational Measurement, 35, 311-327.
. (1994). A Comparison of Item Calibration Media in Computerized Adaptive Testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 18(3).
v18n3p197.pdf (1.07 MB). (1994). A comparison of item calibration media in computerized adaptive tests. Applied Psychological Measurement, 18, 197-204.
. (2015). A Comparison of IRT Proficiency Estimation Methods Under Adaptive Multistage Testing. Journal of Educational Measurement, 52, 70–79. doi:10.1111/jedm.12063
. (2013). A Comparison of Four Methods for Obtaining Information Functions for Scores From Computerized Adaptive Tests With Normally Distributed Item Difficulties and Discriminations. Journal of Computerized Adaptive Testing, 1(5), 88-107. doi:10.7333/1312-0105088
. (2014). A Comparison of Four Item-Selection Methods for Severely Constrained CATs. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 74, 677-696. doi:10.1177/0013164413517503
. (2012). Comparison of Exposure Controls, Item Pool Characteristics, and Population Distributions for CAT Using the Partial Credit Model. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 72, 159-175. doi:10.1177/0013164411411296
. (2013). A Comparison of Exposure Control Procedures in CATs Using the 3PL Model. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 73, 857-874. doi:10.1177/0013164413486802
. (2013). A Comparison of Exposure Control Procedures in CAT Systems Based on Different Measurement Models for Testlets. Applied Measurement in Education, 26, 113-135. doi:10.1080/08957347.2013.765434
. (2010). A comparison of content-balancing procedures for estimating multiple clinical domains in computerized adaptive testing: Relative precision, validity, and detection of persons with misfitting responses. Applied Psychological Measurement, 34, 410-423.
. (2010). A Comparison of Content-Balancing Procedures for Estimating Multiple Clinical Domains in Computerized Adaptive Testing: Relative Precision, Validity, and Detection of Persons With Misfitting Responses. Applied Psychological Measurement, 34, 410-423. doi:10.1177/0146621609349802
. (2018). A Comparison of Constraint Programming and Mixed-Integer Programming for Automated Test-Form Generation. Journal of Educational Measurement, 55, 435-456. doi:10.1111/jedm.12187
. (2016). A Comparison of Constrained Item Selection Methods in Multidimensional Computerized Adaptive Testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 40, 346-360. doi:10.1177/0146621616639305
. (1971). A comparison of computer-simulated conventional and branching tests. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 31, 125-136.
. (2013). A Comparison of Computerized Classification Testing and Computerized Adaptive Testing in Clinical Psychology. Journal of Computerized Adaptive Testing, 1(2), 19-37. doi:10.7333/1302-0102019
. (2000). A comparison of computerized adaptive testing and multistage testing. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: the Sciences & Engineering, 60, 5829.
. (2009). Comparison of CAT Item Selection Criteria for Polytomous Items. Applied Psychological Measurement, 33, 419-440. doi:10.1177/0146621608327801
. (2009). Comparison of CAT item selection criteria for polytomous items. Applied Psychological Measurement, 33, 419–440.
. (1979). A comparison of a standard and a computerized adaptive paradigm in Bekesy fixed-frequency audiometry. Journal of Auditory Research, 19, 1-22.
. (2012). Comparison Between Dichotomous and Polytomous Scoring of Innovative Items in a Large-Scale Computerized Adaptive Test. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 72, 493-509. doi:10.1177/0013164411422903
. (2006). The comparison among item selection strategies of CAT with multiple-choice items. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 38, 778-783.
. (2013). Comparing the Performance of Five Multidimensional CAT Selection Procedures With Different Stopping Rules. Applied Psychological Measurement, 37, 3-23. doi:10.1177/0146621612455687
. (2015). Comparing Simple Scoring With IRT Scoring of Personality Measures: The Navy Computer Adaptive Personality Scales. Applied Psychological Measurement, 39, 144-154. doi:10.1177/0146621614559517
. (2006). Comparing methods of assessing differential item functioning in a computerized adaptive testing environment. Journal of Educational Measurement, 43, 245-264.
. (2006). Comparing Methods of Assessing Differential Item Functioning in a Computerized Adaptive Testing Environment. Journal of Educational Measurement, 43, 245–264. doi:10.1111/j.1745-3984.2006.00015.x
. (2001). A comparative study of on line pretest item—Calibration/scaling methods in computerized adaptive testing. Journal of Educational Measurement, 38, 191-212.
. (2003). A comparative study of item exposure control methods in computerized adaptive testing. Journal of Educational Measurement, 40, 71-103.
. (1991). Comparability of decisions for computer adaptive and written examinations. Journal of Allied Health, 20, 15-23.
. (1991). Comparability of computerized adaptive and conventional testing with the MMPI-2. Journal of Personality Assessment, 57, 278-290. presented at the Oct.
. (2008). Comparability of Computer-Based and Paper-and-Pencil Testing in K–12 Reading Assessments. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 68, 5-24. doi:10.1177/0013164407305592
. (1993). Comparability and validity of computerized adaptive testing with the MMPI-2. Dissertation Abstracts International, 53, 3791.
. (1995). Comparability and validity of computerized adaptive testing with the MMPI-2. Journal of Personality Assessment, 65, 358-71. presented at the Oct.
. (2011). A Comment on Early Student Blunders on Computer-Based Adaptive Tests. Applied Psychological Measurement, 35, 165-174. doi:10.1177/0146621610377080
. (2011). A Comment on Early Student Blunders on Computer-Based Adaptive Tests. Applied Psychological Measurement, 35(2), 165-174. doi:10.1177/0146621610377080
. (2008). Combining computer adaptive testing technology with cognitively diagnostic assessment. Behavioral Research Methods , 40, 808-21. presented at the Aug.
. (1978). Combining auditory and visual stimuli in the adaptive testing of speech discrimination. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 43, 115-122.
. (1988). The College Board computerized placement tests: An application of computerized adaptive testing. Machine-Mediated Learning, 2, 271-282.
. (2014). Cognitive Diagnostic Models and Computerized Adaptive Testing: Two New Item-Selection Methods That Incorporate Response Times. Journal of Computerized Adaptive Testing, 2(4), 59-76. doi:10.7333/1412-0204059
. (2005). A closer look at using judgments of item difficulty to change answers on computerized adaptive tests. Journal of Educational Measurement, 42, 331-350.
. (1947). A clinical study of consecutive and adaptive testing with the revised Stanford-Binet. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 11, 93-103.
. (2000). The choice of item difficulty in self adapted testing. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 16(1), 3-12.
. (1987). CATS, testlets, and test construction: A rationale for putting test developers back into CAT. Journal of Educational Measurement, 32, 185-202.
. (2011). catR: An R Package for Computerized Adaptive Testing. Applied Psychological Measurement. doi:10.1177/0146621611407482
. (2008). CAT-MD: Computerized adaptive testing on mobile devices. International Journal of Web-Based Learning and Teaching Technologies, 3, 13-20.
. (1992). CAT-ASVAB precision. Proceedings of the 34th Annual Conference of the Military Testing Association, 1, 22-26.
. (2000). CAT administration of language placement examinations. Journal of Applied Measurement, 1, 292-302.
. (2000). Capitalization on item calibration error in adaptive testing. Applied Measurement in Education, 13, 35-53.
. (2002). Can examinees use judgments of item difficulty to improve proficiency estimates on computerized adaptive vocabulary tests? . Journal of Educational Measurement, 39, 311-330.
. (1999). Can examinees use a review option to obtain positively biased ability estimates on a computerized adaptive test? . Journal of Educational Measurement, 36, 141-157.
. (2003). Can an item response theory-based pain item bank enhance measurement precision?. Clinical Therapeutics, 25, D34-D36.
. (2003). Calibration of an item pool for assessing the burden of headaches: an application of item response theory to the Headache Impact Test (HIT). Quality of Life Research, 12, 913-933.
bj03913.pdf (285.58 KB)