Compară metode
Examinează metodele selectate una lângă alta; rândurile care diferă sunt evidențiate.
| Analiza fiabilității testelor adaptive computerizate× | Funcționare Diferențială a Itemilor (DIF)× | |
|---|---|---|
| Domeniu | Psihometrie | Psihometrie |
| Familie | Latent structure | Latent structure |
| Anul apariției≠ | 1970s–1980s | 1970s–1993 |
| Autorul original≠ | David J. Weiss and IRT psychometricians | William H. Angoff and colleagues (ETS); systematized by Holland & Wainer |
| Tip≠ | Reliability estimation under adaptive testing | Item-level bias detection |
| Sursa seminală≠ | Weiss, D. J. (1984). Application of computerized adaptive testing to educational problems. Journal of Educational Measurement, 21(4), 361–375. DOI ↗ | Holland, P. W. & Wainer, H. (Eds.) (1993). Differential Item Functioning. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. ISBN: 978-0805809589 |
| Denumiri alternative | CAT reliability, adaptive test reliability, IRT-based reliability estimation, marginal reliability in CAT | DIF, item bias analysis, measurement non-equivalence, item-level measurement bias |
| Înrudite≠ | 4 | 5 |
| Rezumat≠ | CAT reliability analysis quantifies measurement precision in computerized adaptive tests where each examinee receives a unique, individually tailored subset of items. Rather than a single classical coefficient, it uses item response theory to express precision as conditional standard error of measurement at each ability level, and marginal reliability as a global summary across the ability distribution. | 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. |
| ScholarGateSet de date ↗ |
|
|