Equating error was estimated using the same test
by three linear equating methods in three paradigms:
(1) single-link equating of a test to itself, in which a
test was administered on two different dates and the
later administration was equated to the earlier administration
; (2) circular equating through a chain, starting
and ending at the same test; and (3)
equating, in which a test was equated to itself as in
the first approach through equating chains containing
a different number of links as in the second approach.
The mean difference between the actual scores
and the equated scores, as well as the root mean square
of this difference, were used as the criterion measures
for equating error. The results suggested a superiority
of the Tucker method for the conventional circular
equating chain, and the Levine and VCI
yielded smaller errors in about half the equating chains
for the pseudo-circular chain. Unexpectedly, there was
not found to be a clear relationship between the number
of links in the equating chain and the resulting
error. Index terms: circular equating, equating chains,
equating error, equating methods, linear equating.
Gafni, Naomi & Melamed, Estela. (1990). Using the circular equating paradigm for comparison of linear equating models. Applied Psychological Measurement, 14, 247-256. doi:10.1177/014662169001400303
Gafni, Naomi; Melamed, Estela.
Using the circular equating paradigm for comparison of linear equating models.
Retrieved from the University of Minnesota Digital Conservancy,
Content distributed via the University of Minnesota's Digital Conservancy may be subject to additional license and use restrictions applied by the depositor.