Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Educational and Psychological Measurement
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Lee, G.
Right arrow Articles by Frisbie, D. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

The Relative Appropriateness of Eight Measurement Models for Analyzing Scores from Tests Composed of Testlets

Guemin Lee

CTB/McGraw-Hillglee{at}ctb.com

Stephen B. Dunbar

David A. Frisbie

University of Iowa

It has been shown that fundamental assumptions associated with conventional one-factor measurement models are frequently violated in analyses of scores from a test composed of testlets. Eight different measurement models were conceptualized for this kind of situation, and the goodness of fit of each model was examined. Conventional essentially tauequivalent and congeneric models present worse model fit to data and overestimate the reliability when testlets are involved. The one-factor congeneric model with correlated error specifications seems to be the best measurement model for a test composed of testlets if dichotomously scored items are used as the unit of analysis. However, in estimating score reliability for tests composed of testlets, the one-factor essentially tauequivalent model with correlated error specifications also provides good estimates. Measurement models using passage (testlet) scores would be alternatives for analyzing scores from tests composed of testlets when passage (testlet) scores are used as the unit of analysis.

Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 61, No. 6, 958-975 (2001)
DOI: 10.1177/00131640121971590
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Educational and Psychological MeasurementHome page
L. S. Feldt and S. Kim
Testing the Difference Between Two Alpha Coefficients With Small Samples of Subjects and Raters
Educational and Psychological Measurement, August 1, 2006; 66(4): 589 - 600.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Applied Psychological MeasurementHome page
Y. Li, D. M. Bolt, and J. Fu
A Test Characteristic Curve Linking Method for the Testlet Model
Applied Psychological Measurement, September 1, 2005; 29(5): 340 - 356.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Educational and Psychological MeasurementHome page
D. Jarjoura, L. Early, and V. Androulakakis
A Multivariate Generalizability Model for Clinical Skills Assessments
Educational and Psychological Measurement, February 1, 2004; 64(1): 22 - 39.
[Abstract] [PDF]