Comparar métodos
Examine os métodos selecionados lado a lado; as linhas que diferem ficam destacadas.
| Validade de Conteúdo em Testes Adaptativos Computadorizados (TAC)× | Differential Item Functioning× | |
|---|---|---|
| Área | Psicometria | Psicometria |
| Família | Latent structure | Latent structure |
| Ano de origem≠ | 1975 / 1980 | 1970s–1993 |
| Autor original≠ | Lawshe (content validity); Lord & Weiss (CAT framework) | William H. Angoff and colleagues (ETS); systematized by Holland & Wainer |
| Tipo≠ | Validity evaluation / test design | Item-level bias detection |
| Fonte seminal≠ | Lawshe, C. H. (1975). A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel Psychology, 28(4), 563–575. link ↗ | Holland, P. W. & Wainer, H. (Eds.) (1993). Differential Item Functioning. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. ISBN: 978-0805809589 |
| Outros nomes | CAT content validity, adaptive item bank content coverage, content balancing in CAT, CAT blueprint validity | DIF, item bias analysis, measurement non-equivalence, item-level measurement bias |
| Relacionados≠ | 6 | 5 |
| Resumo≠ | 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. | Differential item functioning identifies test or survey items that behave differently for examinees from different groups — such as gender, ethnicity, or language background — after controlling for the underlying ability or trait being measured. DIF analysis is essential for fairness evaluation in educational testing and psychological scale development. |
| ScholarGateConjunto de dados ↗ |
|
|