Computer- vs. paper-based tasks: Are they equivalent?
暂无分享,去创建一个
[1] Per Carlbring,et al. Internet vs. paper and pencil administration of questionnaires commonly used in panic/agoraphobia research , 2007, Comput. Hum. Behav..
[2] John Eustis Williams,et al. Equivalence of standard and computerized versions of the Raven Progressive Matrices Test , 2006, Comput. Hum. Behav..
[3] Hsiu-Mei Huang,et al. Do print and Web surveys provide the same results? , 2006, Comput. Hum. Behav..
[4] Erik Wästlund,et al. Effects of VDT and paper presentation on consumption and production of information: Psychological and physiological factors , 2005, Comput. Hum. Behav..
[5] Daniel H. Robinson,et al. Speed and Performance Differences among Computer-Based and Paper-Pencil Tests , 2004 .
[6] Kenneth Tait,et al. Computer or paper? That is the question: does the medium in which assessment questions are presented affect children's performance in mathematics? , 2004 .
[7] James W. Smither,et al. An Examination of the Equivalence of Web-Based Versus Paper-and-Pencil Upward Feedback Ratings: Rater- and Ratee-Level Analyses , 2004 .
[8] Scott McCoy,et al. Electronic versus paper surveys: analysis of potential psychometric biases , 2004, 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2004. Proceedings of the.
[9] Kate J. Garland,et al. CRT monitors: Do they interfere with learning? , 2004, Behav. Inf. Technol..
[10] Palmer Morrel-Samuels,et al. Web surveys' hidden hazards. , 2003, Harvard business review.
[11] Jan Noyes,et al. VDT versus paper-based text: reply to Mayes, Sims and Koonce , 2003 .
[12] Amie Goldberg,et al. The Effect of Computers on Student Writing: A Meta-analysis of Studies from 1992 to 2002 , 2003 .
[13] Kenneth K. Boyer,et al. Print versus electronic surveys: A comparison of two data collection methodologies , 2002 .
[14] David Schwartz,et al. Social desirability and controllability in computerized and paper-and-pencil personality questionnaires , 2002, Comput. Hum. Behav..
[15] Christopher J. McCarthy,et al. Paper-and-Pencil Or Online? , 2002, Assessment.
[16] Brent Bridgeman,et al. The Effect of Computer-Based Tests on Racial-Ethnic and Gender Groups , 2002 .
[17] Brian C. Cronk,et al. Personality research on the Internet: A comparison of Web-based and traditional instruments in take-home and in-class settings , 2002, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.
[18] Douglas F. Becker,et al. The Score Equivalence of Paper-and-Pencil and Computerized Versions of a Speeded Test of Reading Comprehension , 2002 .
[19] Robert MacCann,et al. Responding to free response examination questions: computer versus pen and paper , 2002, Br. J. Educ. Technol..
[20] Jefferson M. Koonce,et al. Comprehension and workload differences for VDT and paper-based reading , 2001 .
[21] Richard Turner,et al. The myth of the paperless office , 2001 .
[22] Jaeyool Boo,et al. Computerized and Paper-and-Pencil Versions of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale: A Comparison of Psychometric Features and Respondent Preferences , 2001 .
[23] Alysse Weinberg. Comparaison de deux versions d'un test de classement: version papier-crayon et version informatisée , 2001 .
[24] Min Liu,et al. Exploring the use of multimedia examination formats in undergraduate teaching: results from the fielding testing , 2001, Comput. Hum. Behav..
[25] Tianyou Wang,et al. Evaluating Comparability in Computerized Adaptive Testing: Issues, Criteria and an Example , 2001 .
[26] Daniel J. Bernstein,et al. An Examination of the Equivalence between Non-Adaptive Computer-Based and Traditional Testing , 2001 .
[27] Walter P. Vispoel. Computerized Versus Paper-and-Pencil Assessment of Self-Concept: Score Comparability and Respondent Preferences , 2000 .
[28] L. Saxe,et al. A comparison of paper vs computer-assisted self interview for school alcohol, tobacco, and other drug surveys , 2000 .
[29] F. Drasgow,et al. Does computerizing paper-and-pencil job attitude scales make a difference? New IRT analyses offer insight. , 2000, The Journal of applied psychology.
[30] Karen Littleton,et al. Gender, Pair Composition and Computer Versus Paper Presentations of an English Language Task , 2000 .
[31] R. N. Davis,et al. Web-based administration of a personality questionnaire: Comparison with traditional methods , 1999, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.
[32] Michael Russell,et al. Testing On Computers , 1999 .
[33] Stefan E. Schulenberg,et al. The equivalence of computerized and paper-and-pencil psychological instruments: Implications for measures of negative affect , 1999, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.
[34] Richard E. Mayer,et al. Computer-Based Assessment of Problem Solving. , 1999 .
[35] Martina Ziefle,et al. Effects of Display Resolution on Visual Performance , 1998, Hum. Factors.
[36] P Wright,et al. Computer anxiety: a comparison of pen-based personal digital assistants, conventional computer and paper assessment of mood and performance. , 1998, British journal of psychology.
[37] S. Schwartz,et al. Effects of authoritative structure in the measurement of identity formation: individual computer-managed versus group paper-and-pencil testing , 1998 .
[38] G. Neuman,et al. Computerization of Paper-and-Pencil Tests: When are They Equivalent? , 1998 .
[39] Benjamin M. Ogles,et al. Computerized Depression Screening and Awareness , 1998, Community Mental Health Journal.
[40] Wesley C. King,et al. Gender and Administration Mode Effects when Pencil-And-Paper Personality Tests are Computerized , 1998 .
[41] Michael A. Smith,et al. Virtual subjects: Using the Internet as an alternative source of subjects and research environment , 1997 .
[42] Beth E. Haverkamp,et al. Comparison of User Reaction to Two Methods of Strong Interest Inventory Administration and Report Feedback. , 1997 .
[43] Hamish Macleod,et al. Computer Anxiety and Measurement of Mood Change , 1997 .
[44] David Zandvliet,et al. A Comparison of Computer-Administered and Written Tests , 1997 .
[45] Jane Webster,et al. Computer-assisted versus paper-and-pencil administration of questionnaires , 1996 .
[46] D. Dilalla. Computerized Administration of the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire , 1996 .
[47] F. Craik,et al. Relations among memory performance, mental workload and cardiovascular responses. , 1996, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.
[48] Sven G. Carlsson,et al. Computerized testing in a hospital setting: Psychometric and psychological effects , 1996 .
[49] T. Pinsoneault,et al. Equivalency of computer-assisted and paper-and-pencil administered versions of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 , 1996 .
[50] S. Tsemberis,et al. Expert Judgments of Computer-Based and Clinician-Written Reports , 1996 .
[51] Willibald Ruch,et al. A comparison of computerized and conventional administration of the German versions of the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire and the Carroll Rating Scale for Depression , 1996 .
[52] N. Stuckless,et al. The effects of computer versus paper-and-pencil administration on measures of anger and revenge with an inmate population , 1996 .
[53] Edward W. Miles,et al. A quasi-experimental assessment of the effect of computerizing noncognitive paper-and-pencil measurements: A test of measurement equivalence. , 1995 .
[54] Shellie D. Locke,et al. Method of psychological assessment, self-disclosure, and experiential differences: A study of computer, questionnaire, and interview assessment formats. , 1995 .
[55] Robert W. Bell,et al. Computerized versus standard personality measures: Equivalency, computer anxiety, and gender differences , 1994 .
[56] N. Allen,et al. Computerized and Written Questionnaires: Are They Equivalent? , 1994 .
[57] Steven V. Horton,et al. A Comparison of Two Methods of Administering Group Reading Inventories to Diverse Learners , 1994 .
[58] G. E. Rice,et al. Examining Constructs in Reading Comprehension Using Two Presentation Modes: Paper vs. Computer , 1994 .
[59] A. Beck,et al. Use of the computer-administered Beck depression inventory and hopelessness scale with psychiatric inpatients , 1994 .
[60] Andrew Dillon,et al. Designing Usable Electronic Text: Ergonomic Aspects Of Human Information Usage , 1994 .
[61] T. Vansickle,et al. Comparing paper-pencil and computer-based versions of the strong-campbell interest inventory , 1993 .
[62] K. Kobak,et al. Development and validation of a computer-administered version of the Hamilton Rating Scale. , 1993 .
[63] F. Drasgow,et al. Equivalence of computerized and paper-and-pencil cognitive ability tests: A meta-analysis. , 1993 .
[64] C. G. Watson,et al. Do computer-administered Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventories underestimate booklet-based scores? , 1992, Journal of clinical psychology.
[65] K. Kobak,et al. A Computer-Administered Version of the Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale , 1992 .
[66] Dennis Shasha,et al. Information Search with Dynamic Text vs Paper Text: An Empirical Comparison , 1991, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..
[67] Paul Muter,et al. Reading and skimming from computer screens and books: the paperless office revisited? , 1991 .
[68] David J. Oborne,et al. Reading from Screen versus Paper: There is No Difference , 1988, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..
[69] John D. Gould,et al. Reading from CRT Displays Can Be as Fast as Reading from Paper , 1987 .
[70] V Barnes,et al. Reading Is Slower from CRT Displays than from Paper: Attempts to Isolate a Single-Variable Explanation , 1987, Human factors.
[71] R. T. Wilkinson,et al. Proof-reading: VDU and paper text compared for speed, accuracy and fatigue , 1987 .
[72] W. Cushman. Reading from Microfiche, a VDT, and the Printed Page: Subjective Fatigue and Performance , 1986, Human factors.
[73] Susanne Askwall,et al. Computer Supported Reading vs Reading Text on Paper: A Comparison of Two Reading Situations , 1985, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..
[74] Debra M. Switchenko. Reading from CRT versus Paper: The CRT-Disadvantage Hypothesis Re-Examined , 1984 .
[75] Paul Muter,et al. Reading of Continuous Text on Video Screens , 1984 .
[76] J. D. Gould,et al. Doing the Same Work with Hard Copy and with Cathode-Ray Tube (CRT) Computer Terminals , 1984 .
[77] A. Lickorish,et al. Proof-reading texts on screen and paper , 1983 .
[78] William C. Treurniet,et al. Extended Reading of Continuous Text on Television Screens , 1982 .
[79] Anita V. Kak. Relationships Between Readability of Printed and Crt-Displayed Text , 1981 .
[80] John D. Gould,et al. Composing Letters with Computer-Based Text Editors , 1981 .
[81] Wilfred J. Hansen,et al. Why an Examination Was Slower On-Line than On Paper. , 1978 .
[82] Gerald E. Larson,et al. Social desirability effects on computerized and paper-and-pencil questionnaires , 2007, Comput. Hum. Behav..
[83] Kate J. Garland,et al. Paper-based versus computer-based assessment: is workload another test mode effect? , 2004, Br. J. Educ. Technol..
[84] Edward W. Wolfe,et al. Composition Medium Comparability in a Direct Writing Assessment of Non-Native English Speakers , 2004 .
[85] H. K. Lee,et al. A Comparative Study of ESL Writers' Performance in a Paper-Based and a Computer-Delivered Writing Test. , 2004 .
[86] Herschel Knapp,et al. Using pencil and paper, Internet and touch-tone phones for self-administered surveys: does methodology matter? , 2003, Comput. Hum. Behav..
[87] Young-Ju Lee,et al. A comparison of composing processes and written products in timed-essay tests across paper-and-pencil and computer modes , 2002 .
[88] Alysse Weinberg. Comparaison de deux versions d'une test de classement: Version papier-crayon et version informatisee (Comparison of Two Versions of a Placement Test: Paper-Pencil Version and Computer-based Version). , 2001 .
[89] S DeAngelis,et al. Equivalency of computer-based and paper-and-pencil testing. , 2000, Journal of allied health.
[90] Rich Picking,et al. Reading music from screens vs paper , 1997, Behav. Inf. Technol..
[91] P. Bobko,et al. Computer versus paper-and-pencil administration mode and response distortion in noncognitive selection tests. , 1997, The Journal of applied psychology.
[92] F. Vijver,et al. The incomplete equivalence of the paper-and-pencil and computerized versions of the General Aptitude Test Battery , 1994 .
[93] I. Davies. Whatever Happened to Political Education , 1994 .
[94] Ron Oliver,et al. Proof-Reading on Paper and Screens: The Influence of Practice and Experience on Performance. , 1993 .
[95] Andrew Dillon,et al. Reading from paper versus screens: a critical review of the empirical literature , 1992 .
[96] Clay E. George,et al. The effects of computerized versus paper-and-pencil administration on measures of negative affect , 1992 .
[97] S. Hart,et al. Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of Empirical and Theoretical Research , 1988 .
[98] Stephen E. Newstead,et al. Proof-reading on VDUs , 1987 .
[99] Frank H. Heppner,et al. Reading Performance on a Standardized Test is Better from Print than from Computer Display. , 1985 .
[100] B. Plake,et al. Comparing computerized versus traditional psychological assessment , 1985 .
[101] Susan M. Belmore,et al. Reading computer-presented text , 1985 .
[102] Stacey A. Keenan,et al. Effects of Chunking and Line Length on Reading Efficiency. , 1984 .