02950nas a2200205   4500008004100000020004100041245009800082210006900180250001500249260000800264300001200272490000700284520217900291653004302470653006402513100001702577700001402594700001802608856011802626       2009                        eng d  a0214-9915 (Print)0214-9915 (Linking)00aComparison of methods for controlling maximum exposure rates in computerized adaptive testing0 aComparison of methods for controlling maximum exposure rates in   a2009/05/01  cMay  a313-3200 v213 aThis paper has two objectives: (a) to provide a clear description of three methods for controlling the maximum exposure rate in computerized adaptive testing —the Symson-Hetter method, the restricted method, and the item-eligibility method— showing how all three can be interpreted as methods for constructing the variable sub-bank of items from which each examinee receives the items in his or her test; (b) to indicate the theoretical and empirical limitations of each method and to compare their performance. With the three methods, we obtained basically indistinguishable results in overlap rate and RMSE (differences in the third decimal place). The restricted method is the best method for controlling exposure rate, followed by the item-eligibility method. The worst method is the Sympson-Hetter method. The restricted method presents problems of sequential overlap rate. Our advice is to use the item-eligibility method, as it saves time and satisfies the goals of restricting maximum exposure. Comparación de métodos para el control de tasa máxima en tests adaptativos informatizados. Este artículo tiene dos objetivos: (a) ofrecer una descripción clara de tres métodos para el control de la tasa máxima en tests adaptativos informatizados, el método Symson-Hetter, el método restringido y el métodode elegibilidad del ítem, mostrando cómo todos ellos pueden interpretarse como métodos para la construcción del subbanco de ítems variable, del cual cada examinado recibe los ítems de su test; (b) señalar las limitaciones teóricas y empíricas de cada método y comparar sus resultados. Se obtienen resultados básicamente indistinguibles en tasa de solapamiento y RMSE con los tres métodos (diferencias en la tercera posición decimal). El método restringido es el mejor en el control de la tasa de exposición,seguido por el método de elegibilidad del ítem. El peor es el método Sympson-Hetter. El método restringido presenta un problema de solapamiento secuencial. Nuestra recomendación sería utilizar el método de elegibilidad del ítem, puesto que ahorra tiempo y satisface los objetivos de limitar la tasa máxima de exposición.10a*Numerical Analysis, Computer-Assisted10aPsychological Tests/*standards/*statistics & numerical data1 aBarrada, J R1 aAbad, F J1 aVeldkamp, B P  uhttp://mail.iacat.org/content/comparison-methods-controlling-maximum-exposure-rates-computerized-adaptive-testing02175nas a2200301   4500008004100000020001400041245010200055210006900157250001500226300001200241490000700253520109000260653001501350653001501365653002101380653004801401653002401449653002801473653006201501653005701563653001101620653002701631653004601658100001701704700001201721700001401733856012601747       2008                        eng d  a1138-741600aRotating item banks versus restriction of maximum exposure rates in computerized adaptive testing0 aRotating item banks versus restriction of maximum exposure rates  a2008/11/08  a618-6250 v113 a<p>If examinees were to know, beforehand, part of the content of a computerized adaptive test, their estimated trait levels would then have a marked positive bias. One of the strategies to avoid this consists of dividing a large item bank into several sub-banks and rotating the sub-bank employed (Ariel, Veldkamp &amp; van der Linden, 2004). This strategy permits substantial improvements in exposure control at little cost to measurement accuracy, However, we do not know whether this option provides better results than using the master bank with greater restriction in the maximum exposure rates (Sympson &amp; Hetter, 1985). In order to investigate this issue, we worked with several simulated banks of 2100 items, comparing them, for RMSE and overlap rate, with the same banks divided in two, three... up to seven sub-banks. By means of extensive manipulation of the maximum exposure rate in each bank, we found that the option of rotating banks slightly outperformed the option of restricting maximum exposure rate of the master bank by means of the Sympson-Hetter method.</p>
10a*Character10a*Databases10a*Software Design10aAptitude Tests/*statistics & numerical data10aBias (Epidemiology)10aComputing Methodologies10aDiagnosis, Computer-Assisted/*statistics & numerical data10aEducational Measurement/*statistics & numerical data10aHumans10aMathematical Computing10aPsychometrics/statistics & numerical data1 aBarrada, J R1 aOlea, J1 aAbad, F J  uhttp://mail.iacat.org/content/rotating-item-banks-versus-restriction-maximum-exposure-rates-computerized-adaptive-testing