Showing 1 - 5 of 5 Research Library Publications
Posted: | Daniel P. Jurich, Matthew J. Madison

Educational Assessment

 

This study proposes four indices to quantify item influence and distinguishes them from other available item and test measures. We use simulation methods to evaluate and provide guidelines for interpreting each index, followed by a real data application to illustrate their use in practice. We discuss theoretical considerations regarding when influence presents a psychometric concern and other practical concerns such as how the indices function when reducing influence imbalance.

Posted: | P. Harik, R.A. Feinberg RA, B.E. Clauser

Integrating Timing Considerations to Improve Testing Practices

 

This chapter addresses a different aspect of the use of timing data: it provides a framework for understanding how an examinee's use of time interfaces with time limits to impact both test performance and the validity of inferences made based on test scores. It focuses primarily on examinations that are administered as part of the physician licensure process.

Posted: | M. J. Margolis, B. E. Clauser

Handbook of Automated Scoring

 

In this chapter we describe the historical background that led to development of the simulations and the subsequent refinement of the construct that occurred as the interface was being developed. We then describe the evolution of the automated scoring procedures from linear regression modeling to rule-based procedures.

Posted: | S. H. Felgoise, R. A. Feinberg, H. B. Stephens, P. Barkhaus, K. Boylan, J. Caress, Z. Simmons

Muscle Nerve, 58: 646-654

 

The Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS)‐Specific Quality of Life instrument and its revised version (ALSSQOL and ALSSQOL‐R) have strong psychometric properties, and have demonstrated research and clinical utility. This study aimed to develop a short form (ALSSQOL‐SF) suitable for limited clinic time and patient stamina.

Posted: | M. C. Edwards, A. Slagle, J. D. Rubright, R. J. Wirth

Qual Life Res 27, 1711–1720 (2018)

 

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), as part of its regulatory mission, is charged with determining whether a clinical outcome assessment (COA) is “fit for purpose” when used in clinical trials to support drug approval and product labeling. This paper provides a review (and some commentary) on the current state of affairs in COA development/evaluation/use with a focus on one aspect: How do you know you are measuring the right thing? In the psychometric literature, this concept is referred to broadly as validity and has itself evolved over many years of research and application.