Comparar métodos
Revisa los métodos seleccionados uno junto a otro; las filas que difieren aparecen resaltadas.
| Validez de contenido en pruebas adaptativas computarizadas (CAT)× | Teoría de Respuesta al Ítem (TRI)× | |
|---|---|---|
| Campo | Psicometría | Psicometría |
| Familia | Latent structure | Latent structure |
| Año de origen≠ | 1975 / 1980 | 1952–1968 |
| Autor original≠ | Lawshe (content validity); Lord & Weiss (CAT framework) | Frederic M. Lord (and Allan Birnbaum for the 2PL/3PL models) |
| Tipo≠ | Validity evaluation / test design | Probabilistic measurement model |
| Fuente seminal≠ | Lawshe, C. H. (1975). A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel Psychology, 28(4), 563–575. link ↗ | Lord, F. M. & Novick, M. R. (1968). Statistical Theories of Mental Test Scores. Addison-Wesley. link ↗ |
| Alias | CAT content validity, adaptive item bank content coverage, content balancing in CAT, CAT blueprint validity | IRT, latent trait theory, item characteristic curve theory, modern test theory |
| Relacionados≠ | 6 | 5 |
| Resumen≠ | Content validity in computerized adaptive testing (CAT) ensures that an adaptively administered assessment adequately samples the intended content domain despite delivering only a subset of items to each examinee. It integrates classical content validity methods with CAT-specific item bank design and content balancing algorithms to guarantee representative domain coverage at both the item bank and the individual test level. | Item response theory models the probability that a respondent answers an item correctly (or endorses it) as a function of the respondent's latent trait level and the item's own statistical properties — difficulty, discrimination, and guessing. Unlike classical test theory, IRT places persons and items on the same scale, yielding measurement that is sample-independent for items and test-independent for persons. |
| ScholarGateConjunto de datos ↗ |
|
|