방법 비교
선택한 방법을 나란히 검토하세요. 서로 다른 행은 강조 표시됩니다.
| 컴퓨터 적응 검사(CAT)에서의 내용 타당도× | 컴퓨터화된 적응형 검사(CAT)에서의 구성 타당도× | |
|---|---|---|
| 분야 | 심리측정학 | 심리측정학 |
| 계열 | Latent structure | Latent structure |
| 기원 연도≠ | 1975 / 1980 | 1989–2000s |
| 창시자≠ | Lawshe (content validity); Lord & Weiss (CAT framework) | Samuel Messick (unified validity framework); CAT application formalized by Wainer, van der Linden, and colleagues |
| 유형≠ | Validity evaluation / test design | Validity evaluation / psychometric evidence gathering |
| 원전≠ | Lawshe, C. H. (1975). A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel Psychology, 28(4), 563–575. link ↗ | Messick, S. (1989). Validity. In R. L. Linn (Ed.), Educational Measurement (3rd ed., pp. 13–103). American Council on Education / Macmillan. link ↗ |
| 별칭 | CAT content validity, adaptive item bank content coverage, content balancing in CAT, CAT blueprint validity | CAT construct validity, adaptive test construct validation, CAT validity evidence, construct validity evidence in CAT |
| 관련 | 6 | 6 |
| 요약≠ | 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. | Construct validity in computerized adaptive testing evaluates whether the latent trait estimates produced by a CAT instrument genuinely measure the intended psychological or educational construct. Because adaptive algorithms select items individually for each examinee, the validity evidence gathered must account for the variable item exposure and the IRT-based scoring that are unique to CAT administrations. |
| ScholarGate데이터셋 ↗ |
|
|