Compară metode
Examinează metodele selectate una lângă alta; rândurile care diferă sunt evidențiate.
| Invarianța Măsurării în Testarea Adaptivă Computerizată× | Analiza factoriala confirmatorie (CFA)× | |
|---|---|---|
| Domeniu | Psihometrie | Psihometrie |
| Familie | Latent structure | Latent structure |
| Anul apariției≠ | 1990s–2000s | 1969 |
| Autorul original≠ | Building on Meredith (1993) for invariance and Lord (1980) for adaptive testing | Karl Gustav Jöreskog |
| Tip≠ | Measurement equivalence testing in adaptive testing contexts | Hypothesis-testing latent variable model |
| Sursa seminală≠ | Millsap, R. E. (2011). Statistical Approaches to Measurement Invariance. Routledge. ISBN: 978-0805864946 | Jöreskog, K. G. (1969). A general approach to confirmatory maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 34(2), 183–202. DOI ↗ |
| Denumiri alternative | CAT measurement invariance, adaptive test invariance, CAT MI, measurement equivalence in CAT | CFA, confirmatory FA, measurement model, restricted factor analysis |
| Înrudite≠ | 6 | 4 |
| Rezumat≠ | Computerized adaptive test measurement invariance evaluates whether a CAT instrument measures the same latent construct with the same psychometric properties across different groups (e.g., gender, language, clinical vs. community) or time points. It combines IRT-based adaptive test frameworks with measurement equivalence testing to ensure fair and comparable score interpretation. | Confirmatory factor analysis tests a researcher-specified factor structure against observed data. Unlike exploratory approaches, the researcher decides in advance which indicators load on which latent factor, and the model is evaluated by how closely the implied covariance matrix reproduces the sample covariance matrix. CFA is central to scale validation, construct validity assessment, and measurement invariance testing. |
| ScholarGateSet de date ↗ |
|
|