Method evidence record
Computerized adaptive test item analysis
Computerized adaptive test item analysis evaluates and calibrates items intended for use in adaptive testing environments. Unlike fixed-form analysis, it accounts for the non-random item exposure inherent in adaptive administration, using item response theory to estimate item parameters, information functions, and exposure rates across the ability continuum.
Evidence statusSources recorded, not reviewedBibliographic sources are present. Claim-level evidence review has not been performed.
Source record
Recorded
Citations copied verbatim from the method’s source record. No claim-level verification is inferred from them.
Computerized Adaptive Test Item Analysis
Taxonomic method recordlatent-structurepsychometrics
van der Linden, W. J. & Glas, C. A. W. (Eds.) (2000). Computerized Adaptive Testing: Theory and Practice. Kluwer Academic Publishers. · ISBN 978-0792365556
Embretson, S. E. & Reise, S. P. (2000). Item Response Theory for Psychologists. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. · ISBN 978-0805828191
Open full method2 recorded citations, copied from the method source record.
Curated claims
Assessed
Claims persisted in the evidence ledger, each with its own assessment.
No curated claims yet
This view does not invent a claim assessment when the ledger has none.
Related methods
Suggested6
Generated from the method graph and shown as machine-suggested relations. No evidence claim is inferred.
- Taxonomic bucketCAT Scale Development
machine-suggestedRelational suggestion, not evidence.
- Taxonomic bucketComputerized adaptive test reliability analysis
machine-suggestedRelational suggestion, not evidence.
- Taxonomic bucketConfirmatory factor analysis
machine-suggestedRelational suggestion, not evidence.
- Taxonomic bucketDifferential Item Functioning
machine-suggestedRelational suggestion, not evidence.
- Taxonomic bucketItem Response Theory
machine-suggestedRelational suggestion, not evidence.
- Same method familyRasch Model
machine-suggestedRelational suggestion, not evidence.