Item-option weighting of achievement tests: Comparative study of methods
1979
Loading...
View/Download File
Persistent link to this item
Statistics
View StatisticsJournal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Title
Item-option weighting of achievement tests: Comparative study of methods
Authors
Published Date
1979
Publisher
Type
Article
Abstract
Previous research has studied the effects of different
methods of item-option weighting on the reliability
and the concurrent and predictive validity
of achievement tests. Generally, increases in reliability
are found, but with mixed results for validity.
This research attempted to interrelate several
methods of producing option weights (i.e., Guttman
internal and external weights and judges’
weights) and examined their effects on reliability
and on concurrent, predictive, and face validity.
Option weights to maximize reliability produced
cross-validated (N = 974) increases in Hoyt reliability
over rights-only scoring (.82 versus .58, respectively)
; decreases in correlations with other
achievement tests; few changes in predictive validity
; and a loss in face validity (i.e., some correct options
had lower weights than incorrect options).
Weights to maximize validity did not cross-validate
and led to a reduction in reliability and to mixed
validity results. Judges’ weights produced increases
in reliability and mixed results with validity. The
size of Guttman weights were shown to interact
with item-option and test characteristics. It was
concluded that option weighting offered limited, if
any, improvement over unit weighting.
Keywords
Description
Related to
Replaces
License
Series/Report Number
Funding information
Isbn identifier
Doi identifier
Previously Published Citation
Downey, Ronald G. (1979). Item-option weighting of achievement tests: Comparative study of methods. Applied Psychological Measurement, 3, 453-461. doi:10.1177/014662167900300403
Other identifiers
doi:10.1177/014662167900300403
Suggested citation
Downey, Ronald G.. (1979). Item-option weighting of achievement tests: Comparative study of methods. Retrieved from the University Digital Conservancy, https://hdl.handle.net/11299/99831.
Content distributed via the University Digital Conservancy may be subject to additional license and use restrictions applied by the depositor. By using these files, users agree to the Terms of Use. Materials in the UDC may contain content that is disturbing and/or harmful. For more information, please see our statement on harmful content in digital repositories.