This note demonstrates that the convenient and inexpensive procedure suggested by Urry (1974a) for approximating test models (i.e., the normal ogive and logistic models) tends to systematically underestimate ai (item discriminatory power) and overestimate /b i/ (item difficulty). A simple correction for error in estimated ability (θ) is presented which serves to eliminate these biases. Implications for item screening and for item parameterization via maximum likelihood methods and via Urry's more recently developed estimation procedure (1974b) are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Brogden, H. E.Variation in test validity with variation in the distribution of item difficulties, number of items, and degree of their intercorrelation. Pyschometrika, 1946, 11, 197-214.
2.
Kuder, G. F. and Richardson, M. W.The theory of the estimation of test reliability . Psychometrika, 1937, 2, 151-160.
3.
Samejima, F.Syndrome response categories and information functions. Paper read at Psychometric Society Meeting, Palo Alto, Calif., March 1970.
4.
Urry, V. M.Approximations to item parameters of mental test models and their uses. EDUCATIONAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL MEASUREMENT, 1974, 34, 253-269. (a)
5.
Urry, V. W.Ancillary estimators for the item parameters of mental test models. Personnel Research and Development Center, U.S. Civil Service Commission, 1974 . (b)