Using the circular equating paradigm for comparison of linear equating models
Loading...
View/Download File
Persistent link to this item
Statistics
View StatisticsJournal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Title
Using the circular equating paradigm for comparison of linear equating models
Authors
Published Date
1990
Publisher
Type
Article
Abstract
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)
pseudo-circular
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
methods
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.
Keywords
Description
Related to
Replaces
License
Series/Report Number
Funding information
Isbn identifier
Doi identifier
Previously Published Citation
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
Suggested citation
Gafni, Naomi; Melamed, Estela. (1990). Using the circular equating paradigm for comparison of linear equating models. Retrieved from the University Digital Conservancy, https://hdl.handle.net/11299/113590.
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.