|
University of Minnesota Digital Conservancy >
University of Minnesota - Twin Cities >
Applied Psychological Measurement >
Volume 13, 1989 >
Please use this permanent URL to cite or link to this item:
http://purl.umn.edu/107496
|
| Title: | A comparison of two observed-score equating methods that assume equally reliable, congeneric tests |
| Authors: | MacCann, Robert G. |
| Issue Date: | 1989 |
| Citation: | MacCann, Robert G. (1989). A comparison of two observed-score equating methods that assume equally reliable, congeneric tests. Applied Psychological Measurement, 13, 263-276. doi:10.1177/014662168901300306 |
| Abstract: | For the external-anchor test equating model, two
observed-score methods are derived using the slope
and intercept assumptions of univariate selection theory
and the assumptions that the tests to be equated
are congeneric and equally reliable. The first derivation,
Method 1, is then shown to give the same set of
equations as Levine’s equations for random groups
and unequally reliable tests and the "Z predicting X
and Y" method. The second derivation, Method 2, is
shown to give the same equations as Potthoff’s (1966)
Method B and the "X and Y predicting Z" method.
Methods 1 and 2 are compared empirically with Tucker’s
and Levine’s equations for equally reliable tests;
the conditions for which they may be appropriately
applied are discussed. Index terms: Angoff’s Design
V equations, congeneric tests, equally reliable tests,
Levine’s equations (equally reliable), linear equating,
observed-score equating, test equating, Tucker’s equations. |
| Permanent URL: | http://purl.umn.edu/107496 |
| Appears in Collections: | Volume 13, 1989
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Description |
Size | Format |
|---|
| v13n3p263.pdf | | 863Kb | PDF | View/Open |
|
Items in the Digital Conservancy are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
|
