Between Dec 19, 2024 and Jan 2, 2025, datasets can be submitted to DRUM but will not be processed until after the break. Staff will not be available to answer email during this period, and will not be able to provide DOIs until after Jan 2. If you are in need of a DOI during this period, consider Dryad or OpenICPSR. Submission responses to the UDC may also be delayed during this time.

Browsing by Author "Wetzel, C. Douglas"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Component latent trait models for paragraph comprehension tests
    (1987) Embretson, Susan E.; Wetzel, C. Douglas
    The cognitive characteristics of paragraph comprehension items were studied by comparing models that deal with two general processing stages: text representation and response decision. The models that were compared included the prepositional structure of the text (Kintsch & van Dijk, 1978), various counts of surface structure variables and word frequency (Drum et al., 1981), a taxonomy of levels of text questions (Anderson, 1972), and some new models that combine features of these models. Calibrations from the linear logistic latent trait model allowed evaluation of the impact of the cognitive variables on item responses. The results indicate that successful prediction of item difficulty is obtained from models with wide representation of both text and decision processing. This suggests that items can be screened for processing difficulty prior to being administered to examinees. However, the results also have important implications for test validity in that the two processing stages involve two different ability dimensions.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Relationship between corresponding Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) and computerized adaptive testing (CAT) subtests
    (1984) Moreno, Kathleen E.; Wetzel, C. Douglas; McBride, James R.; Weiss, David J.
    The relationships between selected subtests from the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) and corresponding subtests administered as computerized adaptive tests (CAT) were investigated using Marine recruits as subjects. Three adaptive subtests were shown to correlate as well with ASVAB as did a second administration of ASVAB, even though the CAT subtests contained only half the number of items. Factor analysis showed the CAT subtests to load on the same factors as the corresponding ASVAB subtests, indicating that the same abilities were being measured. The preenlistment Armed Forces Qualification Test (AFQT) composite scores were predicted as well from the CAT subtest scores as from the retest ASVAB subtest scores, even though the CAT contained only three of the four AFQT subtests. It is concluded that CAT can achieve the same measurement precision as a conventional test, with half the number of items.