Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-5r2nc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-08T09:35:37.011Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Estimating Item Indices by Nomographs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2025

Robert M. Colver
Robert M. Colver*
Affiliation:
Duke University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Two nomographs are presented for estimating item validity indices identical in value to those obtained from Flanagan 's table and to those obtained from Davis' chart. Experience has shown that the use of the nomographs results in the saving of a significant amount of time with no loss in accuracy. The nomographs also provide a method of quick conversion between the familiar coefficients and the Davis indices, which are less familiar but which offer greater flexibility.

Type
Original Paper
Information
Psychometrika , Volume 24 , Issue 2 , June 1959 , pp. 179 - 185
Copyright
Copyright © 1959 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.)

Footnotes

*

The nomographs as presented here are too small for efficient use. Single copies of larger-sized reproduction may be obtained by writing the author.

References

Appel, V. Companion nomograph for testing the significance of the difference between uncorrelated percentages. Psychometrika, 1952, 17, 325–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arnold, J. N. Nomogram for determining validity of test items. J. educ. Psychol., 1935, 26, 151–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, F. B. Item-analysis data: their computation, interpretation, and use in test construction, Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press, 1949.Google Scholar
Dunlap, J. W. Nomograph for computing biserial correlations. Psychometrika, 1936, 1, 59–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunlap, J. W. and Kurtz, A. K. Handbook of statistical nomographs, tables, and formulas, New York: World Book, 1932.Google Scholar
Fan, C. T. Note on construction of an item analysis table for the high-low-27-percent group method. Psychometrika, 1954, 19, 231–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flanagan, J. C. General consideration in the selection of test items and a short method of estimating the product moment coefficient from the data at the tails of the distributions. J. educ. Psychol., 1939, 30, 674–680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guilford, J. P. The phi coefficient and chi squares as indices of item validity. Psychometrika, 1941, 6, 11–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelley, T. L. The selection of upper and lower groups for the validation of test items. J. educ. Psychol., 1939, 30, 17–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuder, G. F. Nomograph for point biserialr, biserialr, and four-fold correlations. Psychometrika, 1937, 2, 135–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawshe, C. H. A nomograph for estimating the validity of test items. J. appl. Psychol., 1942, 26, 846–849.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindquist, E. F. Educational measurements, Washington: Amer. Council on Educ., 1951.Google Scholar
Thorndike, R. L. Personnel selection: test and measurement techniques, New York: Wiley, 1949.Google Scholar
Thorndike, R. L., Davis, F. B. Item-analysis data: their computation, interpretation, and use in test construction. Psychometrika, 1947, 12, 60–61.Google Scholar