Effects of Immediate Knowledge of Results and Adaptive Testing on Ability Test Performance

This study investigated the effects of immediate knowledge of results and adaptive testing on per formance on a computer-administered test of verbal ability. Examinees were administered either a 50- item conventional test or an adaptive test of verbal ability; half the subjects in each group received im mediate knowledge of results (KR) concerning the correctness/incorrectness of each item response, while the other half did not. Subjects within high- and low-ability subgroups were assigned randomly to one of the four resulting experimental condi tions. The dependent variable was maximum likeli hood ability estimates derived from item response patterns. Results indicated that for the high-ability group, mean test scores under KR conditions were significantly higher than were those under no-KR conditions on both the conventional and adaptive tests. Within the low-ability group, mean test scores were higher under KR conditions than under no- KR conditions, but the difference was statistically significant only within the conventional testing strategy. Low-ability examinees achieved higher average test scores on the adaptive test than on the conventional test, while high-ability examinees per formed equally well on the adaptive and conven tional tests.

[1]  Wayne H. Holtzman,et al.  Computer-assisted instruction, testing, and guidance , 1970 .

[2]  David J. Weiss,et al.  A Computer Software System for Adaptive Ability Measurement. , 1974 .

[3]  William B. Bierbaum.  Immediate knowledge of performance on multiple choice tests. , 1965 .

[4]  T. A. Ringness,et al.  Variations in the intelligence test performance of referred boys of differing racial and socioeconomic backgrounds as a function of feedback or monetary reinforcement , 1971 .

[5]  Melvin R. Novick,et al.  Some latent train models and their use in inferring an examinee's ability , 1966 .

[6]  M. A. Merrill,et al.  Stanford-Binet intelligence scale : manual for the third revision form L-M , 1973 .

[7]  James R. McBride,et al.  Computerized Adaptive Trait Measurement: Problems and Prospects. , 1975 .

[8]  A. Bilodeau,et al.  Motor-Skills Learning , 1961 .

[9]  Peter Secretan,et al.  Stanford Binet Intelligence Scale: Manual for the Third Revision Form L-M , 1963, Mental Health.

[10]  M. R. Novick,et al.  Statistical Theories of Mental Test Scores. , 1971 .

[11]  J. Sattler,et al.  Procedural, situational, and interpersonal variables in individual intelligence testing. , 1967, Psychological bulletin.

[12]  David J. Weiss,et al.  Ability Measurement: Conventional or Adaptive. , 1973 .

[13]  Frederic M. Lord,et al.  SOME TEST THEORY FOR TAILORED TESTING , 1968 .

[14]  Fumiko Samejima,et al.  A comment on Birnbaum's three-parameter logistic model in the latent trait theory , 1973 .

[15]  H. C. Richards,et al.  Effect of Contingent Reinforcement on Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test Performance , 1972 .

[16]  A G Bayroff.  Feasibility of a Programmed Testing Machine , 1964 .

[17]  Richard O. Beeson.  Immediate Knowledge of Results and Test Performance , 1973 .

[18]  David J. Weiss.  The Stratified Adaptive Computerized Ability Test. , 1973 .

[19]  Richard L. Ferguson,et al.  The Application of Item Generators for Individualizing Mathematics Testing and Instruction. , 1971 .

[20]  J. O. Rust,et al.  THE EFFECTS OF IMMEDIATE KNOWLEDGE OF RESULTS AND TASK DEFINITION ON MULTIPLE-CHOICE ANSWERING , 1973 .

[21]  D. Wechsler.  Manual for the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale. , 1955 .