ScholarGate
Asistents

Salīdzināt metodes

Apskatiet izvēlētās metodes blakus; rindas, kas atšķiras, ir izceltas.

Computerized adaptive test discriminant validity×Konstrukta validitāte kompjuterizētajā adaptīvajā testēšanā (CAT)×
NozarePsihometrijaPsihometrija
SaimeLatent structureLatent structure
Izcelsmes gads1959 (discriminant validity); CAT application from 1990s onward1989–2000s
AutorsCampbell & Fiske (discriminant validity framework); applied to CAT by educational measurement researchersSamuel Messick (unified validity framework); CAT application formalized by Wainer, van der Linden, and colleagues
TipsValidity evaluation techniqueValidity evaluation / psychometric evidence gathering
PirmavotsWeiss, D. J. (2004). Computerized adaptive testing for effective and efficient measurement in counseling and education. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 37(2), 70–84. DOI ↗Messick, S. (1989). Validity. In R. L. Linn (Ed.), Educational Measurement (3rd ed., pp. 13–103). American Council on Education / Macmillan. link ↗
Citi nosaukumiCAT discriminant validity, adaptive test divergent validity, CAT scale differentiation, CAT construct separationCAT construct validity, adaptive test construct validation, CAT validity evidence, construct validity evidence in CAT
Saistītās56
KopsavilkumsDiscriminant validity in computerized adaptive testing (CAT) is the evaluation process confirming that a CAT-administered scale measures its intended construct distinctly from related but conceptually different constructs. Despite the adaptive item-selection mechanism varying each respondent's item set, evidence must be provided that CAT-derived scores do not overlap excessively with scores from theoretically distinct scales.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.
ScholarGateDatu kopa
  1. v1
  2. 2 Avoti
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 2 Avoti
  3. PUBLISHED

Doties uz meklēšanu Lejupielādēt slaidus

ScholarGateSalīdzināt metodes: Computerized adaptive test discriminant validity · Computerized adaptive test construct validity. Izgūts 2026-06-15 no https://scholargate.app/lv/compare