Hostname: page-component-669899f699-8p65j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-24T11:50:12.142Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Procedures for Obtaining Separate Set and Content Components of a Test Score

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2025

Gerald C. Helmstadter
Gerald C. Helmstadter*
Affiliation:
Colorado State University†
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Using two distinct models, several formulas for obtaining separate set and content components of a test score have been derived. Comparisons among the methods are made algebraically and through their application to a set of test data apparently affected by response sets.

Type
Original Paper
Information
Psychometrika , Volume 22 , Issue 4 , December 1957 , pp. 381 - 393
Copyright
Copyright © 1957 The Psychometric Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

*

The author wishes to thank Dr. Norman Frederiksen, who brought this problem to his attention, and Drs. Ledyard R Tucker and Frederic M. Lord, who suggested three of the procedures. All have contributed materially to this paper through many helpful suggestions and criticisms.

†

This paper was written while the author was an Associate in Research at the Educational Testing Service, Princeton, New Jersey.

References

Cronbach, L. J. Responses sets and test validity. Educ. psychol. Measmt, 1946, 6, 475–494CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cronbach, L. J. Further evidence on response sets and test design. Educ. psychol. Measmt, 1950, 19, 3–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gage, N. L. and Cronbach, L. J. Conceptual and methodological problems in interpersonal perception. Psychol. Rev., 1955, 62, 401–422CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lord, F. M. A theory of test scores. Psychometric Monogr. No. 7, Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1952Google Scholar
McCornack, R. L. A criticism of studies comparing item-weighting methods. J. appl. Psychol., 1956, 40, 343–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tucker, L. R. Maximum validity of a test with equivalent items. Psychometrika, 1946, 11, 1–13CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed